Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Quad-Core 2012 Mac Mini Mysteriously Reappears on Apple's U.S. Online Store [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Writing this on a 2012 2.6 quad-core i7 Mac mini I bought about a month before the 2014 model dropped. I've never been happier to have gotten a Mac that went off-the-market a month later.
I think the quad-core mini will return, just not this year.
I think the quad-core mini will return, just not this year.
More than one app at the same time, for one.
----------
I totally agree but they've been 'dumbing down' the Server OS ever since Snow Leopard (which was the last 'real' OS X Server). I use the latest generation myself and even with my limited needs (2 domains with 10 users) it's really annoying to work with it. Everything only has a few 'on/off' sliders and if you need to do anything else you need to either hack config files (like I had to do to support email clients running Windows Live Mail) or install third-party software like Icefloor (which I had to use to amend the firewall rules).
What I simply can't understand is that all these things used to be perfectly possible with the old server management tools. There was absolutely no need to 'iPadify' OS X server other than making it a useless piece of ****. The way it is now it suits nobody. For pros it's too simple and home users put everything in the cloud anyway.
Clearly Apple is not interested in the server market and this is their gentle way of making that clear.
Even the client OS is heading this way. I got into OS X in 2003 because it was a great-looking UNIX-style OS with a powerful commandline as well as a strong consistent UI and commercial applications (Office, Adobe etc) available. Linux distro's were a mess at the time. Now more and more things are removed or blocked (X11, the ability to add kernel modules, etc)
It's just a shame to see Apple going for the big numbers and alienating its more advanced userbase. They could have supported both like they always have done.
Last edited:
Man ... I really think this is Apple looking at their rapid refurbished sales, looking at forum sales from macrumors.com, ehmac, craigslist and kijiji sell rates, $$, time it takes to sell and then testing the existing real world market of their users about another Quad-Core i7.
Apple has decided to throw the server market buyers under the bus, because these buyers are too smart to be roped into Apple walled garden with its incredibly high commission charges and its planned obsolescence of the iGadgets.
I've been watching the refurbished site and notice that the 2012 quad core i7 comes up every 20 to 45 days. Lasts about 3 hours then disappears. (I bought one for a friend). I suspect apple noticed these sold like there was no tomorrow. I'm wondering if they accidentally posted them in the new (non-refurbished) site. There is market for the quad core Mac Mini. Hopefully that configuration will return.
I haven't checked the specs but I don't think the power consumption is significantly different between the CPUs. I think the reasoning for getting the quad core is for those that rip their DVDs. I think, but check the forum topic, that the current low end model will do just fine for serving videos and ripping the occasional DVD.
If energy consumption is your concern, I think that the biggest power savings would be achieved by getting a SSD to replace your hard drive.
Last edited:
It might be funny, but I tend to believe he's right: Apple had some spare units to sell, it's the best explanation I can think of. These days I recap how disgusting I find current Apple policies with their products and services, and it can only be compared to my feelings against Microsoft in their days.
That's not the Apple way. The Apple way is that they pick a group of generic consumers, focus on making their experience as good as it can be, and hope that the result works well enough that people in all the niche markets can deal with the remaining warts. Most of the time, that approach works well enough for them to get away with it. When it doesn't, people scream, and Apple makes a correction. For example:
- The Apple logo in the middle of the menu bar
- The hockey puck mouse
- The first time Apple tried to drop FireWire on the MacBook
- The recessed headphone jack in the first iPhone
Yeah, the support for Apache is completely broken, and Server helpfully stomps on my Apache configuration file every time it gets updated. The last time that happened, I didn't even update Server; I just rebooted the machine, and it stomped on the Apache config file. I resorted to writing a script that checks to make sure the machine is reachable by http, sending me a text message via an email-to-SMS gateway if it isn't, so that at least it won't be down for hours without me knowing it. And I changed it to use a different filename with a custom launchd plist, so that when it goes berserk, I just have to issue a couple of launchctl commands to get things back up and running.
Of course, that's still nowhere near as bad as when Server noticed a /Library/WebServer/Documents symlink to half a terabyte worth of data on another drive, and "helpfully" tried to migrate the data into /Library/Server/ (on the root volume) by copying all the files.
So yeah, there's no love lost between me and OS X Server—particularly the App Store version, but really, even the old one caused a fair number of problems. I'd be a lot happier if they'd just leave my configuration files alone, and leave all the setup up to me, complete with loading the launchd plists myself, while they just provide working copies of apache, named, and other key daemons with regular security updates. With that said, I've managed to work around Server.app's brain damage well enough to get the job done, and in the grand scheme of things, that's all that matters.
Then again, I'm half tempted to create a competitor to Apple's Server app just so I don't have to deal with it anymore.
Last edited:
Apple has opened up several new server farms across the US to handle the iCloud traffic... its likely that's where all the updated Xserves and mini servers are, right?
I m very happy. I paid $500 for mine at microcenter back in September. Like others have said, it's a faster CPU and the ram can be upgraded. It's a much better deal.
Not sure if I overlooked any sarcasm tags, but ... Siri runs on HP servers and iCloud is powered by HP and IBM servers.Apple has opened up several new server farms across the US to handle the iCloud traffic... its likely that's where all the updated Xserves and mini servers are, right?
Apple is fully aware it has nothing to offer in the (professional) server market.
Most of the profits come from the iPhone / iPad sales NOT Macintosh.
Always people defending Apple's crap.
Glad I snatched a refurbished 2.3 Quad core i7 Mini.
here's something odd about the pricing as well.
The 2.8ghz version is $999.00, a $300 price increase from the same Mac mini below it but with a .2ghz upgrade. If you decide to customize it and upgrade to a 3.0ghz dual core i7, it's an extra $200, for a total of $1199.00
The 2.6ghz version is $699.00, with the same exact specs as the one above it, but if you decide to upgrade the cpu to the 3.0ghz dual core i7, it's an extra $300, totaling to $999.00.
So why would anyone buy the $999.00 option when they can just buy the $699.00 one, upgrade to 3.0ghz dual core i7, have a better setup AND save $200?
The 2.8ghz version is $999.00, a $300 price increase from the same Mac mini below it but with a .2ghz upgrade. If you decide to customize it and upgrade to a 3.0ghz dual core i7, it's an extra $200, for a total of $1199.00
The 2.6ghz version is $699.00, with the same exact specs as the one above it, but if you decide to upgrade the cpu to the 3.0ghz dual core i7, it's an extra $300, totaling to $999.00.
So why would anyone buy the $999.00 option when they can just buy the $699.00 one, upgrade to 3.0ghz dual core i7, have a better setup AND save $200?
Incorrect. Not the same specs.
The base 2.6 comes with a single 1TB hard drive.
The base 2.8 comes with a 1TB AND PCIe SSD. (aka Fusion drive)
Ever hear of multitasking? The more cores the better for that (I mean who doesn't run more than one app at once on a Mac these days?) not to mention things like VMWare are far more usable at the same time as the Mac side and obviously things like Handbrake (gets a lot of use here to encode my blu-rays, etc.) run night and day faster. I'd LOVE a faster GPU on my 2012 Quad-i7, but I have ZERO interest in the new models. The ONLY Mac that piques my interest at all right now is the 5k iMac and it's too expensive. I'd rather have a 4k monitor and it cost $500-700 less (i.e. all I REALLY want is the GPU it uses).
It's because everyone on here buys a mini to run 50 virtual machines
50? REALLY???
Just try running ONE Windows virtual machine on a dual-core and see how far you get. Just ONE. You now have ONE core for each computer. Now that's fast! NOT!
Yeah, tell that to my quad-i7 mini with RAID 0. If it had a better GPU, it would be the best Mac for the buck Apple EVER made. iMacs force you to buy monitors over and over when you upgrade (utterly utterly ridiculous in this day and age and a total landfill waste in the end since the computer will be obsolete long before the monitor becomes useless in many cases. Apple claims to be more green, but their disposable-based lineup speaks volumes otherwise). I also find your 99% claim highly suspect.
Last edited:
When did they abandon the professional community? I could've sworn both FCX and LPX were heavily updated in the past month or two. Have you seen the new Mac Pro?
----------
Apple was never good in the server market. The only reason they have a server platform is to help manage Macs in a Windows/Linux server environment. Mostly for profile management, maybe caching, and maybe software updates.
Directory services, DNS, DHCP, backups, etc are handled by Microsoft and third party services/tools.
That's my joke each time McDonald's brings back the McRib. "We found another warehouse full of them."