Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
And you don't get that Apple can charge whatever it wishes. It doesn't need to charge market rate for DRAM.

This is an Apple appliance product, not a commodity. You buy an Mac Mini. You don't buy a generic CPU/Motherboard/DRAM/hard drive.

You save by not having to give a damn about parts. You can thank Apple for the time you save, because you saved more money for not wasting your time.

Although I suppose there are some people that like to waste time on computer parts? These people do not use computers for a living, though.

You can buy "preconfigured" computers everywhere. You can use configurators that make sure you're parts are compatible. It's not about "wasting time on computer parts". If you are the type of person to build/assemble your computer and chose every component, you're screwed. If you don't have a spare 300€ for additional 8GB of RAM right now, you're screwed in +1 year as well.

Even if it's just the parts failing, you HAVE TO bring your mac into apple service and you HAVE TO wait for a replacement. You cannot swap the RAM in under 10 minutes. Is this so hard to grasp? Oh and by the way, this is the part where apple is not SAVING you TIME. This is the part where apple makes you waste time AND money. Just try to comprehend that.

Either way, you're screwed, and you seem to think apple is actually doing you a favor.
 
... i'd rather have a unit that is smaller and cheaper ...

It is not smaller, it is not cheaper (most configs are even more expensive)...well it may be for apple and they are making a *****load of money from the overprized upgrades...why on earth would any customer defend any decision by a company that has zero advantage for the customer but only for the customer...currently the most innovative thing apple has done is to create customers like you.
 
Most users won't be doing multi-core tasks on a Mini. For most things, faster cores will beat more cores. The percentage of people that are power users and the mini is the best machine for them is very small. Most people will go for an iMac for power usage, with a small percentage of users that need even more power going for the Pro.
Maybe consider this: Depending on the light situation you are using the computer in, the iMac is just not a viable option (think well lit office) due to its reflective screen (aka happy mirror design or check your white shirt for stains...without the need to use the camera). On the other Hand there is the Mac Pro which is overkill for most but the most demanding video editing folks.
I think what Apple realy misses is the point that there is a potentially HUGE market for a reasonably specced Mac without the build in screen. (I saw the Mini as just that, an iMac without the screen....especially since the iMac already uses mostly laptop parts anyway...)
 
i'm really surprised people still make an effort to upgrade their ram and not just pass off their 3 year old machine on ebay for half price and buy the next model new. my guess is this is not the case for 95% of the people who buy computers and so this soldering of the ram just makes sense. i'd rather have a unit that is smaller and cheaper and has nothing to tinker with which has been optimized to work with what it has installed.

The whole ebay thing is based on people buying someone's "slow" computer and resurrecting it with some more RAM and an SSD. Do you think the prospective ebay buyers will still pay well for a machine that can't be fixed up in this way?
 
Pretty shocked tbh by how lame this 'upgrade' is

I hope Apple aren't turning into the out of touch arrogant bunch they were when Steve was fired , Apple c 1987-1996 were a complete joke who rested on their laurels , went for the top dollar and ignored their user-base who wanted affordable useful products not flashy toys

History repeating itself ?
 
It's regrettable Apple has chosen to move a product 2 years into the future by spec'ing its hardware 4 years in the past.

I accept the Dual Core processor (they wanted to hit the $499 price point and Quad Core isn't something a price sensitive shopper would demand, although anyone would welcome it).

The fixed, soldered RAM in a Mac line that's often been a tinkerer's Mac (and a gateway drug to upgrade happy PC Switchers) is just punitive and reeks of by-the-numbers men staring at Excel.

I could certainly understand fixed RAM if they commissioned Jony for a new enclosure that was 90% smaller and was an all flash based architecture, but nope... they didn't give anyone a reason to believe they had to seal the box and melt the RAM into the main board, so to speak. The only reason they did so was to save themselves money, and cripple buyers into replacing the whole machine faster. It's an environmentally irresponsible move, and I'd even write to the consumerist on it.

Apple doesn't spend a microsecond of time reading MacRumors. Write on their feedback page, hell, email Tim Cook...
 
You can buy "preconfigured" computers everywhere. You can use configurators that make sure you're parts are compatible. It's not about "wasting time on computer parts". If you are the type of person to build/assemble your computer and chose every component, you're screwed. If you don't have a spare 300€ for additional 8GB of RAM right now, you're screwed in +1 year as well.

Even if it's just the parts failing, you HAVE TO bring your mac into apple service and you HAVE TO wait for a replacement. You cannot swap the RAM in under 10 minutes. Is this so hard to grasp? Oh and by the way, this is the part where apple is not SAVING you TIME. This is the part where apple makes you waste time AND money. Just try to comprehend that.

Either way, you're screwed, and you seem to think apple is actually doing you a favor.

It depends on how you look at it. I can give you a list of pros and cons to soldered memory, but so can Apple. I know it sucks to not be able to add memory or swap it out without having to take the product into Apple for servicing.

But here's the flip side that I've experienced first hand, friends of mine experienced and have seen in the field with large numbers of computers.

Memory is a funny thing. Apple has had a long standing stringent requirements for their memory suppliers and they have to pass rigorous testing criteria otherwise, that memory is NOT installed in their computers or sold with the "Apple" name on the box. And for that type of memory, they pay a premium for it. Other companies, typically major computer and other tech mfg like a Cisco or something of that nature typically does the same thing. They want to be assured that the memory they are using in their products are high quality and have passed stringent memory tests to ensure compatibility and reliability. The stuff that doesn't pass with flying colors, but will pass more basic memory tests get sold off to the 3rd party memory suppliers for much less and then it's up to them to perform rigorous tests or not. Some memory companies do have $1 Million test equipment, do perform similar tests as Apple, and other major companies and do sell very reliable memory that's typically compatible, however with some companies it's a crap shoot. Sometimes the memory starts to flake out after a year, sometimes it simply doesn't work right out of the box and sometimes it lasts the life of the rest of the equipment.

I've heard large customers bought 3rd party memory from a company that was selling Apple memory for the same computer, but if you look at the actual memory modules, what they shipped to Apple was significantly different than what they shipped to the customer.

The problem is that we as consumers rarely have all of the technical knowledge and REAL understanding on how to test memory properly and we simply don't have expensive memory test equipment before we install the memory.

Apple, also has their AppleCare and Warranty tech support and they can't support a 3rd party part, so its conceivable that a lot of the problems Apple has with their tech support is directly related to 3rd party memory on these systems and MAYBE they are trying to reduce the number of technical problems and support calls because someone wants to save some money by purchasing 3rd party memory. So, in a way, they are trying to improve the customer experience, it just comes at a cost of the consumer having to buy soldered memory and not be able to upgrade.

I'm sure it's a little cheaper to have the memory soldered directly to the motherboard, because they don't have to pay for memory sockets, but they might be looking at the $$$ in support costs, which they are probably reducing because the memory is installed and tested by robots at the factory.

I know it sucks, but that's how Apple decided to sell the product. If you have a problem with that, then send your suggestions, comments, and complaints directly to Apple.

www.apple.com/feedback
 
Sure, but all of those parts are still removable on most high end systems.

If the argument was about consumer systems becoming more integrated sure, that makes sense and that's where things have been heading since the 1990s with the iMac Bondi Blue.

But the original statement was that NO system was going to have removable parts, which is gibberish. The cloud computing that we rely on more than we do our RAM allotment runs on 24/7 running machines that have hot swappable parts all the way up to the mobo. These infrastructures won't tolerate the idea of turning off a machine and throwing it in the trash.

Then you have the mid tier systems used in many content creation sectors that also need the 24/7 reliability found in systems that can remain running while a HDD, RAM, Mobo, Ethernet, etc is removed for repair or integration. Those systems usually need multiple configurations and PCI cards hooked into different pieces of hardware for redundancy and connectivity. Avid ISIS based systems need faster NIC cards that are compatible with Avid hardware and maybe even FIBRE channel that's preferably NOT external and taking up valuable rack space.

In the end, it's okay to assume that the future of computing is going to based in novelty systems . . . .that's fine and has been talked about for longer than most users on these forums have been alive.

But to say that everyone in every industry across the board should be fine with 16GBs of RAM total is absurb.

Lastly, even After Effects is a mid tier piece of software. Running it alone might only require up to 4GB of RAM on the Mac, but on PC based systems it can use up to 8GBs and that's normal for some deeply layered comps.

Then there's software like Avid Media Composer which uses more system resources than most can imagine. It's wicked fast, and even faster when running the ISIS clients and connecting over networked shared storage and some of the freelancers I work with have MC running along with After Effects, Photoshop, and maybe a Sorenson Squeeze encode running, all of which are RAM heavy apps.

Again, that's not to say that the Mini would be used in that environment, just that soldered RAM is perfect for consumer systems, but it's not the best solution for all systems across all industries.

I think you were answering you own question there - Consumer systems as this is what this thread is about. ]

Of course work systems will remain modular. It's entirely different. They have dedicated system engineers looking after them. It's the exact opposite of what makes a good home system.

Open box, plug in, work for 7 years*, no user based tinkering allowed.
*obsolesence be damned. My 2008 air is still going strong. Even on Yosemite. And, this is where other manufactures fail, still looks brand new!

Even Server tech will change in the future. I wonder if Apple will do an X-serve again - but entirely different. Just a modular CPU unit that runs OSX with everything connect via thunderbolt. Or perhaps this is what the mini will become in the future?

The Irony is you have chosen Avid as a comparison. Who are actually the worst culprits of using and charging a fortune for bespoke hardware and 'integrated' software solutions. It's about as far from this conversation as an comparing F1 to a Beetle. The mini doesn't even meet it's minimum specs because of the Graphics or Hard drive speed unless you go SSD.

I use smoke, nuke, Maya, Cinema 4d and none of those will run well on a mini. But they are blazingly fast on my nMacPro.

I referenced After Effects as it runs pretty well on a mini so long as you are not doing 4k or using the 3D raytraying

----------

Greedy Apple, LAME on you!

I think it's Lame you don't understand that Broadwell is not out yet, and as such a 4 core version would have mean designing a whole new system... or wait 6 months and release a Broadwell version that will be a whole lot better.

----------

Pretty shocked tbh by how lame this 'upgrade' is

I hope Apple aren't turning into the out of touch arrogant bunch they were when Steve was fired , Apple c 1987-1996 were a complete joke who rested on their laurels , went for the top dollar and ignored their user-base who wanted affordable useful products not flashy toys

History repeating itself ?

See Above.

----------

So what if the ram fails. Can't replace it as its soldered in. So what then you're stuck with a lemon.

And the base 499 model is only 1.4ghz cpu. That's too low for Yosemite isn't it.

99.9% of the time Ram fails is because of the connectors oxidising or blowing due to moisture/dust etc.

Soldering Significantly reduces that

+ this article
http://macperformanceguide.com/mbpRetina2012-speed-memory-bandwidth.html
 
Just read the store-page. "configurable only in the apple online store" applies to all models.

Yeah, again, the language on customizing RAM doesn't show denominations for any of the models.

Huge bummer. The primary benefit of the current Mac mini body style was upgradable RAM that was accessible. Now, it's neither.
 
Dissapointed

As one of the many waiting for this 'upgrade', I'm pretty shocked to see the CPU so downgraded. Now it is possible, as another poster indicated, that this generation's quad-core (featuring IRIS) run too hot and the ones within the Mac Mini's thermal envelope have lesser graphics. Well, I'd like the option anyway, as that quad core will make a huge difference to me. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a product downgraded like this, it makes me a little concerned that Apple's management are neglecting the 'Mid-level' in pursuit of extremely expensive high-end products and admittedly gorgeous consumer-level ones.

I really can't see any good reason why they don't let you upgrade the ram and even better, change the disk drive yourself. You can save a lot that way and can do so whenever you like. If laptops allow it and the Mac Mini server did, why restrict options like this? It seems like they are trying to push us to get either an iMac or a Macbook Pro Retina. The thing is, I personally already have a decent monitor and don't like the idea of getting stuck with the iMac's capabilities, or settling for a 15-inch laptop screen, however good. Rather than pay for the monitor each time, I'd like the option of a good 'headless Mac', affordable enough to change every few years.

There has to be a significant market for the Mac Mini, I'm just really disappointed they messed up this upgrade and made it something of a downgrade. I'll probably wait and see what next year brings, as with Intel's new chips some much-delayed updates may come along. Hopefully we'll get the 'real' Mini update. :) Thunderbolt 3 (for that 4k 60hz screen), even better graphics and quad core back on the table. I shouldn't have to fantasize about an update just when the latest model is announced, though.:eek:
 
It depends on how you look at it. I can give you a list of pros and cons to soldered memory, but so can Apple. I know it sucks to not be able to add memory or swap it out without having to take the product into Apple for servicing.

But here's the flip side that I've experienced first hand, friends of mine experienced and have seen in the field with large numbers of computers.

Memory is a funny thing. Apple has had a long standing stringent requirements for their memory suppliers and they have to pass rigorous testing criteria otherwise, that memory is NOT installed in their computers or sold with the "Apple" name on the box. And for that type of memory, they pay a premium for it. Other companies, typically major computer and other tech mfg like a Cisco or something of that nature typically does the same thing. They want to be assured that the memory they are using in their products are high quality and have passed stringent memory tests to ensure compatibility and reliability. The stuff that doesn't pass with flying colors, but will pass more basic memory tests get sold off to the 3rd party memory suppliers for much less and then it's up to them to perform rigorous tests or not. Some memory companies do have $1 Million test equipment, do perform similar tests as Apple, and other major companies and do sell very reliable memory that's typically compatible, however with some companies it's a crap shoot. Sometimes the memory starts to flake out after a year, sometimes it simply doesn't work right out of the box and sometimes it lasts the life of the rest of the equipment.

I've heard large customers bought 3rd party memory from a company that was selling Apple memory for the same computer, but if you look at the actual memory modules, what they shipped to Apple was significantly different than what they shipped to the customer.

The problem is that we as consumers rarely have all of the technical knowledge and REAL understanding on how to test memory properly and we simply don't have expensive memory test equipment before we install the memory.

Apple, also has their AppleCare and Warranty tech support and they can't support a 3rd party part, so its conceivable that a lot of the problems Apple has with their tech support is directly related to 3rd party memory on these systems and MAYBE they are trying to reduce the number of technical problems and support calls because someone wants to save some money by purchasing 3rd party memory. So, in a way, they are trying to improve the customer experience, it just comes at a cost of the consumer having to buy soldered memory and not be able to upgrade.

I'm sure it's a little cheaper to have the memory soldered directly to the motherboard, because they don't have to pay for memory sockets, but they might be looking at the $$$ in support costs, which they are probably reducing because the memory is installed and tested by robots at the factory.

I know it sucks, but that's how Apple decided to sell the product. If you have a problem with that, then send your suggestions, comments, and complaints directly to Apple.

www.apple.com/feedback

There's no such thing as Apple memory. Apple doesn't manufacture RAM. They buy the same RAM that's available to the consumer. They just pay a much lower price for it. So, soldered RAM is even more of a ripoff than it appears at first glance.
 
Pay attention to what? A small fraction of people complaining about something which they might not even be a Mac Mini buyer? Guess it is the same people who complain the batter on iPhone is not replaceable. I can't even recall having seen a person carry an extra battery for their Samsung phone. People here complain any small detail just to complain. You want proof? Visit U2 free album thread.

U2 apologized
 
I think you were answering you own question there - Consumer systems as this is what this thread is about. ]

It wasn't my question.

It was a statement made by another forum member that needed clarification.

Apple won't make another server.

Avid's top notch, like Apple, so they'll charge what they want. The initial cost of ownership is actually quite low. It's the maintenance that will kill you. This all in regards to an ISIS system that is.

Other manufacturers can build and maintain a box for 8+ years or more too. It's just all about the initial investment. I've seen many XPS systems pushing 8 years on the consumer end that run circles around newly release OSX boxes. Then the Precision and Elitebook systems are in a league of their own.
 
People already have. They have stopped buying all apples computers somewhat. That is why apple says things like the ipad is their best selling device. Yeah because that is the only device they update properly. They slack on their computers and have for a long while. They confuse slow sales with lack of demand but people aren't entirely stupid. They are waiting for the headless imac, a real mac that will never materialize because apple has had its head stuck so far up its arse for so long. Plus their plan to make everything they sell disposable is sickening. Once the imacs couldn't be upgraded I had enough. The mac mini was the last system that was worth buying. They can take all their computers now and shove them.

I don't know where you are getting your data but Mac sales are doing damn well. In short, the Millennials are finally coming into a consumer force where they are educated and can judge quality of computers and software instead of on price. Hence, you drop a few hundred extra of a good quality machine and you avoid hundreds of hours dealing with Microsoft OS issues.
 
Not really.

  • 16GB of 1600 SO-DIMM cost $144 on Newegg.
  • You've never been in the position to just add 8GB, going to 16 means replacing two 4GB modules with two 8GB modules.

Okay, so you want to keep moving the goal line, huh? :)

First of all, I know all about removing RAM, and what the upgrade requires. Believe me, I have upgraded plenty of RAM in my life.

But the point isn't about buying 16GB of 1600 SO-DIMM on day one. It's about having the option to buy it later. $144 is the price today, but I can virtually guarantee you that the price will do nothing but come down, and the cost will be in the $100 range within 6 months to a year. Besides, last time I checked $144 was still cheaper than $200. And you get to keep you 2 x 4GB chips (that OWC will in fact take as a trade-in).

Finally, Amazon is actually selling Crucial 2 x 8GB of 1600 SO-DIMM for $136, with free Prime shipping. In case you're in the market...
 
"limited to 16GB of RAM"

This world is getting out of control. The problem with providing massive specs to solve performance problems is that the performance problems just get worse because developers are lazy, so more specs are needed, and it's an endless cycle. The pressure needs to be put onto software developers to create lean, mean software, not bloated messes like what Adobe puts out. Don't blame Apple here.. 16GB is a LOT of RAM to be working with. Contact your favourite software houses and demand that they ensure they are using RAM as efficiently as possible. Make noise in that arena.

I use Solidworks 2011 at work all day long and rarely use over 8GB even in the most extreme situation. I have 64GB in the system with 12 cores. It does have more to do with the developer utilizing the extra memory.

----------

There's no such thing as Apple memory. Apple doesn't manufacture RAM. They buy the same RAM that's available to the consumer. They just pay a much lower price for it. So, soldered RAM is even more of a ripoff than it appears at first glance.

Or it has more to do with increasing the reliability on there machines. I'm sure it's never the 3rd party ram causing problems in macs.
 
Or it has more to do with increasing the reliability on there machines. I'm sure it's never the 3rd party ram causing problems in macs.

It has nothing to do with that. It's a money grab, plain and simple. Otherwise, the price would be identical to the market rate or less, since Apple isn't paying anywhere near the market rate.
 
It has nothing to do with that. It's a money grab, plain and simple. Otherwise, the price would be identical to the market rate or less, since Apple isn't paying anywhere near the market rate.

Imagine that. Apple trying to make a profit off of something you are NOT forced to buy.
 
There's a reason Apple invited Vogue to their press keynote.

Okay, so the target demographic for Apple's products are the kind of people who are easily impressed by the glossy pages of Vogue...

And you don't get that Apple can charge whatever it wishes. It doesn't need to charge market rate for DRAM.

This is an Apple appliance product, not a commodity. You buy an Mac Mini. You don't buy a generic CPU/Motherboard/DRAM/hard drive.

You save by not having to give a damn about parts. You can thank Apple for the time you save, because you saved more money for not wasting your time.

Although I suppose there are some people that like to waste time on computer parts? These people do not use computers for a living, though.

... and at the same time, the target demographic for Apple's products are people who use computers for a living? Suddenly it is professional needs that are relevant. Something does not add up here.

I will not thank Apple for the new mini. It has not saved me any time (I'm not buying it). Apple on the other hand can thank me for not buying it. Never mind any money they might have made, because the absence of my order has saved them the whole production cost of one Mac mini. Taken in isolation this saved cost is a good thing, right? No need to look at the whole picture?
 
I always thought it was a wretched design in the 1st place. I could only imagine the amount of pompous words that spewed out of Ive's mouth when he pitched that. Yikes.

Even with the RAM at one time being accessible, the hard drive being the way it was to replace was dumb. Something the size of a XBOX 360, or Alienware mini would have been awesome. Also could have thrown a nice GPU in there. 100% guaranteed that if Apple pitched a slightly larger mini with Ive talking in front of a white background the fanboys would eat it up and say "we needed this"

Yosemite BTW looks like a skin a teenage girl would use. Reverted back to ML and it looks far better IMO. Not liking their direction over the past few years. Personal taste of course, results vary.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.