New 2014 Mac Mini Has Soldered RAM, Not User Replaceable

[69650]

I am in the exact same boat (train?) you are. There is nothing they currently make that I want. NOTHING.

It used to be that I wanted everything they put out.

My, how things change.

Totally agree with you. This year I will buy the iPhone 6 to replace my 5s and the iPad Air 2 as I don't currently have a tablet and that's it. There is absolutely nothing else they currently have that I want.

I was hoping for a new design 12" MBA but that didn't happen. I was hoping for a new design colour iMac (without the chin and huge black border around the screen) but that didn't happen. I was hoping for a new design Mac mini, a sort mini version of the Mac Pro which I think looks really nice but I don't need that level of performance. I was hoping for an iPod with 128GB or 256GB so I could use it for all my music instead of clogging up my iPhone. The 15" MBP is still way too expensive which is why I still use a 15" Windows laptop.

 

[alvindarkness]

If you are running an Atom board any of the Minis would be perfectly fine for your needs.

Im running the atom board as it was something i had handy in the closet and want to experiment with linux (to see if its a do-able route) while the MBP gets repaired, not that its something thats sufficient for my needs. Funnily enough I have 3 hackintoshes in the house that run well, and one Apple laptop that doesnt. But Im over Apple in general. The whole bluetooth adapter / smbios checking in yosemite was the final straw, clearly showing that they care a little more about planned obsolence than they do about customers.

 

[wizard]

Really? Eliminating the socket and the row of contacts results in simpler.

You would think that would be obvious.

I don't recall anyone saying that DIMMs are rocket science.

Memory subsystems aren't rocket science but there is hard electrical engineering involved especially if you are after fast performance. What people don't realize is that engineering becomes far more difficult at the higher speeds.

No speed up for DDR3 or DDR4 from eliminating DIMMs, but most of the next generation technologies competing to replace DDR4 will require eliminating DIMMs in order to advance performance.

Even DDR 4, in the higher speed grades, will require soldered in RAM to get maximum performance.

 

[Digital Skunk]

It will happen.

Further I have to wonder if people realize that many of Intel mobile processors only address 16GB of RAM. You might not be able to upgrade some of these machines no matter what Apple does.

It won't. Not in 2020. Six years from now many highend machines will still have user replaceable RAM and components. No one spends $4k on a machine that can't be serviced without ripping the whole thing out of a rack.

----------

I've worked in enterprise IT departments. They don't have time to fix desktop computers at all. It's going in the direction of replacing computers, not fixing them. They don't want lemons. The broken computers will get sold off to companies who will fix as many as they can and sell them second hand to tinkerers. Enterprise IT departments increasingly don't care at all about replaceable components.

True about the lemons. But 24/7 usage predicates the need for hotswapping. No high end user of any system would want to turn off the machine just to replace a simple broken part. Replaceable hardware may become a highend user niche thing but it's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Also, it hasn't gone the way of replacing an entire machine if the RAM or drive needs repair or replacing. That's just insane.

 

[H2SO4]

So, in day to day use…….

I’m talking a browser with 4 or 5 open tabs, iTunes open as well as EyeTv, Messages and Mail and a Handbrake encode here and there.
Will I notice any difference between the new base model and the old base model?
(The new is clocked at 1.4GHz with 2.7 turbo and the old is clocked at 2.5GHz with 3.1 turbo).

 

[tennisproha]

RIP in peace.

lol fail

 

[jaymzuk]

The PeeCee makers will soon follow Apple with directly soldered DRAM. By about 2020, no one will be making computers that accept DIMMs.

It's fine to assert that Apple are half a decade ahead of the curve in that respect, even if it is to the consumers detriment. But if that's the case, is a dual core processor going to be perfectly serviceable after 5 year's worth of OSX updates and software progress?

That looks like exactly the type of product that Apple will essentially kill off with a new OSX feature that people will want but won't make available to a good proportion of devices because of this sort of decision.

 

[wizard]

This thread has 1000 posts, not too common on Macrumors. Apple may not think that soldered RAM in the Mac mini is problem, but Macrumors members certainly do.

1000 idiotic posts can not change the math of technology. To put it simply the people complaining have no idea where technology is going. To get faster computers have to get smaller, that is what process shrinks do. DIMMs are however very far from most processors these days in an electrical sense and that is a problem. Expect things to progress like this in the future to address the issue:

1. Soldered on RAM operating at much higher speeds.
2. RAM integrated into the processor module. (Intel is working on this right now).
3. RAM attached to the processor die in a 3D stack.
4. RAM on the SoC.

The path before us is laid out by the physics of electronics.

Frankly RAM is like the spinning hard drives of a few years ago, it is incredibly slow relative to the processor. To fix that you need new technologies and structures. All one has to do is to look at bit at some of the proposed high performance RAM solutions that are being developed. The days of DIMM making sense will quickly go the way of the floppy drive.

 

[H2SO4]

1000 idiotic posts can not change the math of technology. To put it simply the people complaining have no idea where technology is going. To get faster computers have to get smaller, that is what process shrinks do. DIMMs are however very far from most processors these days in an electrical sense and that is a problem. Expect things to progress like this in the future to address the issue:

1. Soldered on RAM operating at much higher speeds.
2. RAM integrated into the processor module. (Intel is working on this right now).
3. RAM attached to the processor die in a 3D stack.
4. RAM on the SoC.

The path before us is laid out by the physics of electronics.

Frankly RAM is like the spinning hard drives of a few years ago, it is incredibly slow relative to the processor. To fix that you need new technologies and structures. All one has to do is to look at bit at some of the proposed high performance RAM solutions that are being developed. The days of DIMM making sense will quickly go the way of the floppy drive.

Does that include or exclude your post?

 

[dazzer21]

If this is a trade-off against having user-accessibilty against a smaller Mac Mini, then Apple's thin-ness fetish is starting to work against it. Personally, I like the form factor of my old G4 Mini. It's a perfect size, and if you work out what internals a modern day one of those could have inside it given the extra space, even at £100-£150 more than the current prices, the thing could scream AND have user-replacable RAM, more of it, bigger drives, more I/O... but then that would no doubt cannibalise iMac Sales, which would mean a more powerful iMac would be needed, in which case the Mac Pro would need to be upgraded as well... If Apple are going to keep the faith, it's going to take more than a new watch and the 'appliance' that is the iPad to maintain it and they need to re-think their ranges. If I was in the Market for a new Mac right now, I'd be tempted to go for a cheaper, last-year's spec machine from eBay or somewhere. A die-hard for many years, lusting after the latest kit, I'm currently sitting at my 2008 iMac and thinking "this works for me..."

 

[wizard]

Take some time to research things.

It's fine to assert that Apple are half a decade ahead of the curve in that respect, even if it is to the consumers detriment. But if that's the case, is a dual core processor going to be perfectly serviceable after 5 year's worth of OSX updates and software progress?

Consider this, many of Intels mobile processors can only address 16GB of RAM. It isn't like you can actually add more than 16 GB of RAM to many of these processors. Combine that with the power profiles of the more advanced offerings and you have a machine that is the best that can be made at this time.

As far as the dual core goes, the important part of the processor is the GPU as that often impacts feel more than anything. In short though yes it I'll run OSX fine in five years. More importantly in five years a whole new generation of hardware will have established itself. This future hardware will he far more powerful than today's.

With the way hardware advances it is silly to spend money on upgrades when the delta between the old and new is so great.

That looks like exactly the type of product that Apple will essentially kill off with a new OSX feature that people will want but won't make available to a good proportion of devices because of this sort of decision.

Oh come on, Apple isn't inherently evil. Support for new technologies on old hardware is a mixed bag on any platform. Even with Linux you see distros moving on an ignoring old hardware. It just doesn't make sense to focus your energies on past hardware when it doesn't have a chance in hell of supporting new features well.

I find this whole thread perplexing because the new Mini gives us what many of us have wanted for years now. That is a Haswell based Mini that has decent GPU performance and more TB ports. The soldered in RAM means nothing especially when you can easily max out the machine. Effectively this is the best Mini to debut in years.

----------

Does that include or exclude your post?

It may be idiotic but at least my post is supportable by science.

 

[Blue Sun]

The problem with this change is that it wasn't necessary. There was no redesign, no internal reshuffling to better accommodate more powerful components, nothing. Just a cheap ploy to make more money.

In the rMBP soldered RAM is understandable (and logical), but in the case of the Mac Mini, it is pure greed.

 

[H2SO4]

Consider this, many of Intels mobile processors can only address 16GB of RAM. It isn't like you can actually add more than 16 GB of RAM to many of these processors. Combine that with the power profiles of the more advanced offerings and you have a machine that is the best that can be made at this time.

As far as the dual core goes, the important part of the processor is the GPU as that often impacts feel more than anything. In short though yes it I'll run OSX fine in five years. More importantly in five years a whole new generation of hardware will have established itself. This future hardware will he far more powerful than today's.

With the way hardware advances it is silly to spend money on upgrades when the delta between the old and new is so great.


Oh come on, Apple isn't inherently evil. Support for new technologies on old hardware is a mixed bag on any platform. Even with Linux you see distros moving on an ignoring old hardware. It just doesn't make sense to focus your energies on past hardware when it doesn't have a chance in hell of supporting new features well.

I find this whole thread perplexing because the new Mini gives us what many of us have wanted for years now. That is a Haswell based Mini that has decent GPU performance and more TB ports. The soldered in RAM means nothing especially when you can easily max out the machine. Effectively this is the best Mini to debut in years.

----------



It may be idiotic but at least my post is supportable by science.

I never suggested one way or the other. I just wondered if you considered yours one of the offending ones.

 

[hotpotato123]

Indeed. The nerds can go buy a Dell or HP and let them worry about their low-margin business.

Right now, no one that actually matters is complaining about soldered RAM.

The world wants appliances, not computer parts.

And the only people complaining about computer parts are the nerds. lol. These people are the WORST.

There's a reason Apple invited Vogue to their press keynote.

Don't get me wrong. I hate soldered RAM because I have previously always upgraded the RAM in computers. I hate it, but I realise Apple don't care.

----------

You know, I can understand that. Apple's gotta make money, and hell..they are. The thing that mystifies me the most is how some people will defend anything and everything the company does, even if it is at their own expense.

Yeah, technology is always moving on, and some things end up becoming depreciated or obsolete. But the ram and HDD upgradability issues isn't one of those things. Now if Apple somehow found a way to implant the ram and HDD directly to the logic boards for a massive performance boost, not being able to upgrade them would be understandable. The pros outweigh the cons.

But all Apple is doing is keeping people from being able to do it easily themselves so they can make more money off their storefront. The harddrives in the iMacs? They're goddamn off the shelf Seagates. Why can't I upgrade it? What if it goes bad? Hell, I'd have to send it to Apple for repairs, and if it's out of warranty, that's even more money I have to spend.

It benefits them, but it does nothing for us. We, the customer, gain nothing.

Why defend it?

I wasn't defending it. When I say Apple are uncaring money-grubbers, that's not defending their decision to solder in the RAM. I'm just saying you can't stop a pig from wallowing in filth. Similarly, you can't stop Apple from trashing its customers in the struggle up the mud pile to clutch for more cash.

----------

HHAHAH yah sure that is their only aim. You are delusional.

If you happen to be working in an area where you need features, which only a minority want -- e.g. anti-glare, non reflective screens -- Apple trashes you. You don't matter. The only customers that matter are mainstream users.

 

[dilbert99]

Apple is after high margins, and as a shareholder, I have no problem with that. If Apple loses a few thousand enthusiasts to Hackintosh over this decision,

And if you lose me because I am hacked off with the mini, you lose me for my rMBP that I use for software development, you also lose all the other recommendations. Then when I scotch back to windows/linux, you lost me with the iPhone/iPad too.

Apple is being short sighted, 43+ pages is testament to this...

 

[armsakimbo]

1000 idiotic posts can not change the math of technology. To put it simply the people complaining have no idea where technology is going. To get faster computers have to get smaller, that is what process shrinks do. DIMMs are however very far from most processors these days in an electrical sense and that is a problem. Expect things to progress like this in the future to address the issue:

1. Soldered on RAM operating at much higher speeds.
2. RAM integrated into the processor module. (Intel is working on this right now).
3. RAM attached to the processor die in a 3D stack.
4. RAM on the SoC.

The path before us is laid out by the physics of electronics.

Frankly RAM is like the spinning hard drives of a few years ago, it is incredibly slow relative to the processor. To fix that you need new technologies and structures. All one has to do is to look at bit at some of the proposed high performance RAM solutions that are being developed. The days of DIMM making sense will quickly go the way of the floppy drive.

This is not a performance machine. This is their basement desktop and the rationale for soldering the RAM is not increased performance - it is increased profit margins.

 

[waveboreale]

Indeed. The nerds can go buy a Dell or HP and let them worry about their low-margin business.

Right now, no one that actually matters is complaining about soldered RAM.

The world wants appliances, not computer parts.

And the only people complaining about computer parts are the nerds. lol. These people are the WORST.

There's a reason Apple invited Vogue to their press keynote.

Are you dumb or you are doing it on purpose ?

Vogue & cie were invited for the presentation of the Apple Watch in September not the Mac in October.

 

[imlynxy]

OMG! Almost returned my iMac 5K, when I saw this title with my side vision

 

[RockSpider]

"We're not in it for the money".

 

[dilbert99]

Apple does not have to concern itself with user

don't agree, but the issues are not really as much to do upgradability as to the Apple memory tax.

 

[6r4ff3r]

I would buy the base model without extras, to replace my daily pentium 4 presscott with only 2.5 gb RAM running Windows 7 pro 32 bits.

Its a pain in the rack not be friendly-upgradable, but i prefer save the money and use the computer while it lasts or its funcional.

But its my personal opinion.

 

[dilbert99]

Really? Eliminating the socket and the row of contacts results in simpler.


I don't recall anyone saying that DIMMs are rocket science.


No speed up for DDR3 or DDR4 from eliminating DIMMs, but most of the next generation technologies competing to replace DDR4 will require eliminating DIMMs in order to advance performance.

Just meaning that its not hard during assembly to slot in a couple of DIMMS,

hardly rocket science is just a figure of speech meaning it is simple

 

[Larry-K]

1000 idiotic posts can not change the math of technology. To put it simply the people complaining have no idea where technology is going. To get faster computers have to get smaller, that is what process shrinks do. DIMMs are however very far from most processors these days in an electrical sense and that is a problem. Expect things to progress like this in the future to address the issue:

1. Soldered on RAM operating at much higher speeds.
2. RAM integrated into the processor module. (Intel is working on this right now).
3. RAM attached to the processor die in a 3D stack.
4. RAM on the SoC.

The path before us is laid out by the physics of electronics.

Frankly RAM is like the spinning hard drives of a few years ago, it is incredibly slow relative to the processor. To fix that you need new technologies and structures. All one has to do is to look at bit at some of the proposed high performance RAM solutions that are being developed. The days of DIMM making sense will quickly go the way of the floppy drive.

So you're saying that the vanguard of all this cutting-edge, forward looking, high-peformance technology is the Mac Mini?

(by the way the base model includes that hard drive of a few years ago you mention).

 

[cgc]

Must...press...DVNO button...

I encourage others to as well.

 

[MagicBoy]

Soldered on RAM, removal of quad core CPUs and the basic version is has the weak 1.4GHz CPU.

Bad form Apple. Feedback form heading your way.