Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Wrong. :rolleyes:

Benchmarks have conclusively proven its a dog compared to last year's model.

Just because someone posts thousand-word replies doesn't mean they know what they are talking about. ;)

Which models are you referring to? All models seems to be performing better than the 2012 counter part, discounting for multi-core performance of the quad core model for obvious reasons.
 
So what if systems have had socketed memory for decades. That doesn't mean anything. These are small form factor models with very little room inside and they want to cut the costs of production and support. That's the best way to do it.

I know the socketed is easier to change, but if the soldered memory doesn't fail as often, then they don't have to replace the motherboard as often. When they put sockets inside, they get a lot of DIYers doing their own upgrades and that's where the problems are. Flaky RAM, users not installing properly, hence, increased support costs.

Seriously, these low end system have very little profit margin to begin with and they have to do what they have to do to cut costs and improve reliability. It's a FACT that soldered RAM is more reliable than socketed. It's also face that Apple supplied memory is more reliable than 3rd party RAM. Faulty RAM is one of the biggest hardware problems and they are trying to reduce those problems and this is how they are doing it. It's not that big of a deal.

Floppys used to be used, but those went bye bye, same with optical drives, and now HDD's are going bye bye for SSDs. Well, in case you haven't noticed, soldered memory is the direction Apple has been going. They only have a few models with socketed RAM and they are the more expensive models for desktops. That's the direction they are going. Like it or not, that's their direction and I don't think they are going to go back. Just a gut feeling.

Just go on Apple's Support Community forum and do some searches on RAM related issues, just about every single one of them is 3rd party RAM related. You'll see people using 3rd party RAM have far more problems than Apple supplied RAM. Go look up the community submissions and look for yourself.

You're confusing the design necessity of a compact mobile device with the choice of going with soldered vs socketed on a desktop.

There's little proof that there's any cost-saving in proprietary soldered RAM modules VS mass-produced standard socketed RAM but I would hazard a guess that by economics of scale, the mass-produced socketed RAM is cheaper in ALL circumstances.

Your floppies analogy is worthless sarcasm. RAM is here to stay, you could say Firewire 800 vs Thunderbolt 2 is akin to the removal of older, dated technology but RAM in a socket is a standard feature of all but the most compact of systems and as every iteration of the Mac Mini to date has had socketed RAM up until now and maintains the same dimensions as 3 previous models, there is no valid argument for using soldered RAM other than to gouge their customers.
 
Come on guys, please explain something to me.

If you NEED 16GB in a few years, how come I still see people use 10+ year old dells with around 512 MB of ram or 1GB of ram running Windows XP? Some don't even have the latest service pack!

So tell me, why.....WHY will EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE USER NEED NEED 16GB in a few years?

I STILL get by with 8GB of ram with heavy After Effects and Photoshop usage.

These are not server machines, or pro machines. Just like a Dell from 10+ years ago can ONLY achieve 1-2GB of ram

You can run Yosemite perfectly fine with 1-2 GiB of RAM. Why does anyone get more RAM than 1-2GiB then? We don't need 4.
 
You can run Yosemite perfectly fine with 1-2 GiB of RAM. Why does anyone get more RAM than 1-2GiB then? We don't need 4.

That is my point. If the most intensive thing you do is write resumes in Pages, you do not need 16GB of ram.

Like I said, people (grandparents, parents, just general users) do not actively upgrade their ram. I still use my iMac with 2GB of ram. I have had to deal with people having computer issues and they are still using an old Dell with 512MB of ram with Windows XP.

I have 8GB of RAM in my classic Mac Pro, and I do a lot of after effects and video editing. I never felt the need to get more ram.
 
Like I said, people (grandparents, parents, just general users) do not actively upgrade their ram. I still use my iMac with 2GB of ram.

And you are absolutely correct, however, what does it hurt by having socketed RAM in those machines? Even if those folks never use it, there are some (many?) of us who want to be able to upgrade RAM ourselves for much less than Apple prices.

I bought my son's 13" MBP in the summer of 2011 (came with 4GB RAM) for him to use at college; he is also a musician and started using logic pro heavily on his machine (about a year ago) and it was lagging (he also tends to not close out other open apps).

I bought a single 8GB RAM stick (under $100) from Amazon and popped it in his MBP and he now has 10GB total RAM and no more lag. If the machine had soldered RAM, either he would have to put up with an unsatisfying experience or, what?, I would need to buy another MBP?

It is nothing more than a shameless money grab by Apple.
 
And you are absolutely correct, however, what does it hurt by having socketed RAM in those machines? Even if those folks never use it, there are some (many?) of us who want to be able to upgrade RAM ourselves for much less than Apple prices.

I bought my son's 13" MBP in the summer of 2011 (came with 4GB RAM) for him to use at college; he is also a musician and started using logic pro heavily on his machine (about a year ago) and it was lagging (he also tends to not close out other open apps).

I bought a single 8GB RAM stick (under $100) from Amazon and popped it in his MBP and he now has 10GB total RAM and no more lag. If the machine had soldered RAM, either he would have to put up with an unsatisfying experience or, what?, I would need to buy another MBP?

It is nothing more than a shameless money grab by Apple.

Really? Shameless money grab? Isn't the new Mac Mini cheaper? And lets say 90% of Mac Mini purchasers do not get more than the stock config. How is that a money grab?

And don't make Apple out to be the only bad guy here. Last time I ordered a Dell, their ram upgrade prices were ridiculous too.
 
Really? Shameless money grab? Isn't the new Mac Mini cheaper? And lets say 90% of Mac Mini purchasers do not get more than the stock config. How is that a money grab?

And don't make Apple out to be the only bad guy here. Last time I ordered a Dell, their ram upgrade prices were ridiculous too.

Well, it's cheaper if you want a 1.4GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 and 4GB (of soldered) RAM.

Admitted, other manufacturer RAM upgrades are also expensive, however, as long as they are socketed, you can upgrade later, at a more reasonable cost.
 
Really? Shameless money grab? Isn't the new Mac Mini cheaper? And lets say 90% of Mac Mini purchasers do not get more than the stock config. How is that a money grab?

And don't make Apple out to be the only bad guy here. Last time I ordered a Dell, their ram upgrade prices were ridiculous too.

To get a valid measure of the cost you should divide the price with the usable lifetime of the product. How many dollars per year does it cost? That will be less if the RAM is soldered and inadequate. The Dell you ordered, did it have soldered RAM?
 
To get a valid measure of the cost you should divide the price with the usable lifetime of the product. How many dollars per year does it cost? That will be less if the RAM is soldered and inadequate. The Dell you ordered, did it have soldered RAM?

Again, how many people upgrade their ram? The Dell I fixed recently had 512MB of ram with Windows XP. That computer could support 2GB of ram, yet the owner never upgraded.
 
Again, how many people upgrade their ram? The Dell I fixed recently had 512MB of ram with Windows XP. That computer could support 2GB of ram, yet the owner never upgraded.

The issue isn't "how many people upgrade their RAM". Rather, it is about consumer choice. The Mac Mini was previously specifically engineered to allow easy access to upgrade the RAM, complete with the tool-less screw-off bottom. It was highlighted as a feature. The 2014 MM now has non-standard Torx screws which required iFixit to engineer a new part just to open the damn thing.

It's plain to see the direction Apple has been headed. They are shifting all of their products to that of appliances with planned obsolescence.
 
To get a valid measure of the cost you should divide the price with the usable lifetime of the product. How many dollars per year does it cost? That will be less if the RAM is soldered and inadequate. The Dell you ordered, did it have soldered RAM?

But that assumes that the need for more memory will continue to grow indefinitely. The way I see it, it's more likely faster memory that will bring added performance going forward and these CPUs are limited to DDR3 @1600 Mhz. Sure, 4GB may prove to be to little if your use changes, but if you need anything but the most basic machine just go for the mid model, then you get a faster processor and 8GB from the start.
 
Should not be a surprise...

Apple has been moving this route for awhile... I still have one legacy mac pro but that's it, and I'm certainly not a windows advocate, but moved back to win/nix for purchasing for business uses in a media company.

Apple has been cannibalizing the pro market for awhile now, at least 5-6 years... I think more people will feel this one though.

Xserve was discontinued, cluster nodes discontinued, Apple Raid's discontinued, OSX Server moved only to mac mini, 17" MBP gone, 30" ACD gone, Mac Pro less configurable after going over years w/o a refresh.

Of course, was blasted for "whining" when these things disappeared, and "why would you need that" blah blah blah... well, welcome to the party! Many of us have felt this way for years.

I/we used mac mostly in 2000s when windows xp/vista were terrible... went back to building windows boxes for new purchases in 2011... Win 7 is not that bad as people make it out to be, in fact, it's good.
 
Last edited:
Apple has been moving this route for awhile... I still have one legacy mac pro but that's it, and I'm certainly not a windows advocate, but moved back to win/nix for purchasing for business uses in a media company.

Apple has been cannibalizing the pro market for awhile now, at least 5-6 years... I think more people will feel this one though.

Xserve was discontinued, cluster nodes discontinued, Apple Raid's discontinued, OSX Server moved only to mac mini, 17" MBP gone, 30" ACD gone, Mac Pro less configurable after going over years w/o a refresh.

Of course, was blasted for "whining" when these things disappeared, and "why would you need that" blah blah blah... well, welcome to the party! Many of us have felt this way for years.

I/we used mac mostly in 2000s when windows xp/vista were terrible... went back to building windows boxes for new purchases in 2011... Win 7 is not that bad as people make it out to be, in fact, it's good.


I will be looking at Win 10 next year... with the addition of expose/spaces like feature it will cover the one major thing missing for me. Would prefer to stick with osx, but for getting real work done, I think apple is no longer a good choice.
 
Which models are you referring to? All models seems to be performing better than the 2012 counter part, discounting for multi-core performance of the quad core model for obvious reasons.

Well, now you get to pay $699 USD for 40% LESS performance. You cannot say that represents better performance. And never mind potential longevity by being able to easily and affordably replacing a failed drive or adding RA

Like the ripoff iMac - half the performance for 14% cost savings at retail.

Apple is really taking the p**s with its entry level machines, and has started the descent from being king of the hill.
 
Well, now you get to pay $699 USD for 40% LESS performance. You cannot say that represents better performance.

Of course not, but where did you get the 40% figure from? The error made here is comparing multicore performance to single core performance.

All the current models perform BETTER, core for core! If you were planning on getting the $10k quad core model, it's of course unfortunate that the quad option is gone. But let's try to be honest with the comparissons here, your claim is factually wrong.
 
Last edited:
The issue isn't "how many people upgrade their RAM". Rather, it is about consumer choice. The Mac Mini was previously specifically engineered to allow easy access to upgrade the RAM, complete with the tool-less screw-off bottom. It was highlighted as a feature. The 2014 MM now has non-standard Torx screws which required iFixit to engineer a new part just to open the damn thing.

It's plain to see the direction Apple has been headed. They are shifting all of their products to that of appliances with planned obsolescence.

Computers, smartphones and tablets have been appliances for a very long time already.
 
Computers, smartphones and tablets have been appliances for a very long time already.

However computer prices are not getting into the small appliances price range. And those in the current low end of the spectrum are disposable crippled machines.

The last MacBook I bought was in 2008. Since then I have upgraded the RAM and replaced the HDD and SSD various times, moved the optical drive out and got an external BluRay drive.
The latest upgrades to the model/retina made by Apple and the price range to only use it for 2 years are not what I want.

We are not rich, nor want to buy a disposable Mac, nor want to pay for Apple Care. Apple's manufacturing quality sucks.

Macs used to be the be all personal computer, with a Mac you were able to run any OS, now even former versions of OS X are no longer running on purpose. This sucks.

With the old late 2008 MBP I can run anything from Leopard (Rosetta included) to Yosemite.

Apple either rescue its essence of providing Macs that can be serviceable without all that glue and soldered stuff that cannot be serviced or upgraded, or significantly lowers its prices to make it worth it.
Let's see what will happen in 2015.
Apple promises new hardware and then delivers a small amount gradually over the years.
A big quantum leap is still needed.
 
However computer prices are not getting into the small appliances price range. And those in the current low end of the spectrum are disposable crippled machines.
And the iPhone, despite fitting the "appliance" moniker, is still very far from a small appliance price range. Instead, it costs as much as a Mac computer.
We are not rich, nor want to buy a disposable Mac, nor want to pay for Apple Care. Apple's manufacturing quality sucks.
Sure Apple doesn't seem to care too much about quality anymore, but they're still certainly better than most similarly-priced manufacturers. And don't dismiss AC too quickly: on laptop that get the usual beating from being hauled quite often, just one small quirk means having to replace the whole logic board, a costly operation well worth the extra cost.

During the less than 3 years I had this MBP, I had to have the power adapter replaced twice (probably broken cable), trackpad once, HDD cable thrice (seems very fragile in that specific model), prematurely chipping keys. With labor cost, it would already have been more expensive without AC. Still less maintenance than a typical Windows PC.
With the old late 2008 MBP I can run anything from Leopard (Rosetta included) to Yosemite.
Macs usually can run the then-current OS when they were first put on the market. Did you expect Apple to sporadically update older OSes to add drivers for newer systems? Releasing new and incompatible OSes and hardware is a whole different problem that they sure have.
 
Macs used to be the be all personal computer, with a Mac you were able to run any OS, now even former versions of OS X are no longer running on purpose. This sucks.

What utter rubbish. Macs are approved to run the current OS at the time they were launched and newer versions only. You've never been able to run any old versions of OS X on a new Mac. There's been the odd instance of later speed bumped models being able to run the previous OS version given the correct old restore media, but they are the exception rather than the rule (eg late-2009 mini or the late-2011 MacBook Pro).

With the old late 2008 MBP I can run anything from Leopard (Rosetta included) to Yosemite.

Good for you. So can I with my Mac mini.
 
What utter rubbish. Macs are approved to run the current OS at the time they were launched and newer versions only. You've never been able to run any old versions of OS X on a new Mac. There's been the odd instance of later speed bumped models being able to run the previous OS version given the correct old restore media, but they are the exception rather than the rule (eg late-2009 mini or the late-2011 MacBook Pro).



Good for you. So can I with my Mac mini.

Rubbish? By OS I mean any OS not limited to Mac OS X.There is no technical reason why you cannot run it in a virtual machine or with an emulator. Snow Leopard was not allowed by Apple to run in a virtual machine, and forced the users to buy the server version, and at the end it doesn't work for rosetta apps.
 
Rubbish? By OS I mean any OS not limited to Mac OS X.There is no technical reason why you cannot run it in a virtual machine or with an emulator. Snow Leopard was not allowed by Apple to run in a virtual machine, and forced the users to buy the server version, and at the end it doesn't work for rosetta apps.

Eh? I'm failing to understand what licensing restrictions and virtualisation have to do with your original statement? Apple locked their OS to Apple branded hardware, it's right there in the EULA. They've always provided ingenious transition technologies to keep applications working when they change processor architectures e.g. fat binaries and 68k emulation, Classic mode under PowerPC OS X, then universal binaries and Rosetta more recently on Intel.

There's plenty of reasons why you can't virtualise old versions of OS X, mainly around driver support. Apple's tightly integrated hardware and software means they're not geared up for knocking out generic graphics card and IO device drivers for older unsupported versions of OS X. That'd only get you back to 10.4.5 anyway. As for third party OS's, that's down to EFI. They might support Boot Camp dual boot, they've never claimed you can install any OS you like on a modern Mac. It's still a Mac, not a Wintel clone with a BIOS.
 
Does anyone sell a tool kit for the new Mac Mini? I'm interested in getting the 1.4GHz with 8GB upgrade and install my own SSD option.

Going to use it as a home server with 5-7 users - DNS, DHCP, Open Directory, File Sharing, Caching, and Time Machine. I think the 1.4GHz should handle it fine. Thoughts?
 
Snow Leopard was not allowed by Apple to run in a virtual machine, and forced the users to buy the server version, and at the end it doesn't work for rosetta apps.

Wrong twice!

It was a common Urban Myth that the Snow Leopard EULA prohibited the virtualization of Snow Leopard in Lion and then Mt. Lion and Mavericks on a Mac.

That myth has been debunked over the last several years.

The action by Apple to drop the price of Snow Leopard Server by 95% to $20 rendered moot, whatever debate about this issue still exists!

Snow Leopard and Snow Leopard Server in virtualization has been used by many, many users of PowerPC applications that needed access to Rosetta in a Lion, Mt. Lion and Mavericks world!
 
For me the soldered RAM is not such a big deal. The lack of quad core is more annoying. Apple is trying to push people to get iMac for anything other than a media PC. It's almost like Mac mini was too good and eating up the margins of the more profitable iMacs, and they had to downgrade it.

Sadly, I think you're correct. The current CEO is in no way trying to walk in the former CEO's footsteps. I was all set to buy the so-called 'latest and greatest' design, but instead they built a version that turned their customers off. This thing' is a huge step backwards and reflects a different direction for Apple. :confused:

Making buttermilk from butter ~ I suppose if you were to spec' it out w/16, i73.0 & 1TB Flash, it would make a great little Skype machine in a Sonnet xMacMini Server. No, it's not a good value but if you have that sort of Rack need, then so be it.

Apple Customer since 1984
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.