the mac mini increase that nobody is talking about.

[Bazza1]

Don't forget about that sock they were charging up to 230 dollars.

I was refuting the member's assessment that Apple has long watched out for the consumer when it came to pricing

Absolutely.

While the Mac / Apple community has had a reputation as being tech savvy (even if that's because Nanny Apple doesn't let you do a lot outside the box) and creative, I'm afraid many of us appear to be retail rubes, falling time and time again for something "Squirrel!" from Apple, with Apple applying its best 'PT Barnum School of Retail Humbug' to these suckers - sorry, I mean 'customers'.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Absolutely.

While the Mac / Apple community has had a reputation as being tech savvy (even if that's because Nanny Apple doesn't let you do a lot outside the box) and creative, I'm afraid many of us appear to be retail rubes, falling time and time again for something "Squirrel!" from Apple, with Apple applying its best 'PT Barnum School of Retail Humbug' to these suckers - sorry, I mean 'customers'.

The worst is when folks are defending horrendously overpriced kit as "so much better & totally worth it!" in any number of ways.

(think of the polishing cloth, the phone cases, watch bands, etc)

 

[maflynn]

Sure. It's not required for the monitor to work. It's mostly cosmetic.

A monitor stand is not cosmetic. You either need one or you don't. Regardless, it was your assessment that Apple wasn't not anti-consumer, I think I and other members were quick to provide evidence of them trying (and succeeding) at gouging the consumer

 

[BeatCrazy]

A monitor stand is not cosmetic. You either need one or you don't. Regardless, it was your assessment that Apple wasn't not anti-consumer, I think I and other members were quick to provide evidence of them trying (and succeeding) at gouging the consumer

Just like any large consumer-facing company, Apple makes products at a wide variety of price points. Not dissimilar to how General Motors has a $125K Escalade and $25K Chevy Trax.

You can't just bring up $700 wheels or $1000 monitor stands while selectively ignoring the Mac Neo. That's not "evidence" any more than pointing out the Escalade exists.

 

[Charlie Bonesx]

A monitor stand is not cosmetic. You either need one or you don't.

Sure, but you needn’t buy it from Apple

 

[subjonas]

With Apple's profit margins in the 30 to 40% range for their laptops, Apple could have easily absorbed the price hike. Promoted the hell of their products and increased sales. They probably would have made more money

Again, one can't look at each product as a standalone business--it makes no sense to do so. Companies use different profit margins for different products strategically to hit a company's overall profit goal. So whether a company can afford to eat into margins depends on the company's overall profit margin, not the margins of a single product or product line. Apple's overall net profit was somewhere around 27% last I checked. For reference, I believe MS and Google were both around 37%.

Also, we have to assume Apple has done their research and already explored the financials of lowering prices to increase volume, as well as raising prices (even more) to increase profit, and landed on the prices that they did because it was the optimal balance of profit and volume to bring in the most overall money. Conversely to your suggestion, some people think Apple can just keep raising prices arbitrarily and they'd make more money, so Apple used rising component costs as an opportunity to do that. But the principle that--lower price means higher volume, and higher price means lower volume--is true. So assuming Apple is financially smart and had already priced their products at the optimal balance, then they would have only raised prices by as much as they needed to in order to adjust for increased operation cost. But that's hard for people to believe because they tend to only zero in on the products with the most dramatically increased price, not noticing the other products that were increased less or not at all, and assume insane profits across the board. But again, we can easily see whether that's true at their next earnings call when they disclose their overall net profit. But I suspect most readers here skip over those articles.

 

[subjonas]

While the Mac / Apple community has had a reputation as being tech savvy

Really? I always thought of Windows and Android users as the more tech savvy tinkerer types, and Apple users as more of the "just work well so I can get on with my life" types.

 

[Pacific1972]

Again, one can't look at each product as a standalone business--it makes no sense to do so. Companies use different profit margins for different products strategically to hit a company's overall profit goal. So whether a company can afford to eat into margins depends on the company's overall profit margin, not the margins of a single product or product line. Apple's overall net profit was somewhere around 27% last I checked. For reference, I believe MS and Google were both around 37%.

Also, we have to assume Apple has done their research and already explored the financials of lowering prices to increase volume, as well as raising prices (even more) to increase profit, and landed on the prices that they did because it was the optimal balance of profit and volume to bring in the most overall money. Conversely to your suggestion, some people think Apple can just keep raising prices arbitrarily and they'd make more money, so Apple used rising component costs as an opportunity to do that. But the principle that--lower price means higher volume, and higher price means lower volume--is true. So assuming Apple is financially smart and had already priced their products at the optimal balance, then they would have only raised prices by as much as they needed to in order to adjust for increased operation cost. But that's hard for people to believe because they tend to only zero in on the products with the most dramatically increased price, not noticing the other products that were increased less or not at all, and assume insane profits across the board. But again, we can easily see whether that's true at their next earnings call when they disclose their overall net profit. But I suspect most readers here skip over those articles.

---

I see it similarly, but I also believe that Apple has priced the “Mac Mini” at the same level as a desktop computer,
given its minimal sales figures (compared to various MacBook models and the MacBook NEO).

In addition to the fast M4 processor with GPU and advanced AI capabilities (16GB), this also includes the use
of various interfaces, including multiple USB-C ports, among other things, for connecting multiple monitors
(separates it from Apple's notebook range) !

However, the price increase is also driven by rising RAM prices for high-speed memory as well as increased prices
for SSD storage - and of course, to eliminate the MacBook NEO's extremely low pricing, where Apple was perhaps
also surprised by required RAM and storage prices, increased by global AI requirements & increased sales of NEO !

I've found a computer in the Mac Mini M1 with 16GB that, when paired with a 32-inch M8 UHD
multimedia monitor (+ capable of video conferencing), is a game-changer.

The Mac Mini M1 (16GB) with a Samsung M8 monitor costs almost as much as a Mac Mini M4, and even
though it’s slower, you can run any game or app on it thanks to the latest macOS and it' compatibility !

Professional users who focus on specific apps will find more powerful products from Apple in both the desktop and
notebook categories. But what people still pay the most for (and many are grateful for it or know it deep down)
are the unique features of Apple products !

---

 

[Nekronos]

Sorry for the repeat post, but:

Micron locks in historically high memory prices for five years

Big buyers agree to deals that will deliver historically enormous margins and profits

www.theregister.com

I'm not sure what the point of referencing this article is, if this is meant to detract from what I said or what but this article echoes sentiment of supply improving in 2028, which supports what I've said. Given the volatility of demand and geopolitics, who knows where things will really end up but one thing is for certain, supply is ramping.

 

[jakey rolling]

Sure. It's not required for the monitor to work. It's mostly cosmetic.

IIRC, if you didnt buy the stand, you still had to pay a couple hundred for a VESA adapter. There were no mounting options at all with the monitor as-is. Pretty blatant considering there was (and continues to be) no non-esthetic benefit in using any of Apple's monitor stands or VESA mounts.

Yes, I bought one. No, I don't regret it. I wasn't 'forced to' and if I was appalled by a $1000 stand, I probably had serious misgivings about a Pro Display XDR price in the first place.

"You are not the intended customer" is just one of many elitist refrains people use to self-justify spending hundreds of extra dollars on a metal case and a logo.

 

[BeatCrazy]

IIRC, if you didnt buy the stand, you still had to pay a couple hundred for a VESA adapter. There were no mounting options at all with the monitor as-is. Pretty blatant considering there was (and continues to be) no non-esthetic benefit in using any of Apple's monitor stands or VESA mounts.


"You are not the intended customer" is just one of many elitist refrains people use to self-justify spending hundreds of extra dollars on a metal case and a logo.

Let me guess, you're a "Tim Crook" type of guy, and everyone who thinks otherwise is elitist.

 

[Populus]

Cheap mini pc's on Amazon with the N95 or N150, are around $300.

Wow! That’s double the price I paid for a little N150 miniPC that I bought with a 256GB SSD (which I immediately replaced with a 500GB NVMe) and, wait for it, 12GB of LPDDR5 RAM, last year.

 

[Populus]

"You are not the intended customer" is just one of many elitist refrains people use to self-justify spending hundreds of extra dollars on a metal case and a logo.

Funnily enough, I was told exactly this words at an Apple Store when I returned I think it was an iPhone, because the screen looked way worse than the display devices on the table. Something along the lines of “well, if you can’t tolerate those minimal differences, maybe you’re not the target customer of Apple”. This happened more than a decade ago.

 

[bigglow]

In the Philippines some retailers still have these Mac minis at these cash prices

Mac mini M4 16GB 256GB
- ₱36,990 12% VAT inc or
- $540 VAT ex

Mac mini M4 16GB RAM 512GB
- ₱50,990 12% VAT or
- $745 VAT ex

 

[JPack]

In the Philippines some retailers still have these Mac minis at these cash prices

Mac mini M4 16GB 256GB
- ₱36,990 12% VAT inc or
- $540 VAT ex

Mac mini M4 16GB RAM 512GB
- ₱50,990 12% VAT or
- $745 VAT ex

Good deal, we'll probably never see them at $449 or $499 ever again.

 

[bigglow]

Cheap mini pc's on Amazon with the N95 or N150, are around $300.

Before Win 10 EOL in Oct 2025 I got this Beelink Mini S12 Intel Alder Lake N95 12TH Gen 8GB RAM 256GB SSD Windows 11 Home Mini PC (that used to have Win 11 Pro) for ₱7,500 VAT inc or under $100 to replace mid tier Acer desktops from 2015.

 

[bigglow]

Good deal, we'll probably never see them at $449 or $499 ever again.

But sadly Mac mini M4's 20 months already.

I was holding out for a Mac mini M5 at WWDC 2026 four weeks ago 🙁

 

[subjonas]

Funnily enough, I was told exactly this words at an Apple Store when I returned I think it was an iPhone, because the screen looked way worse than the display devices on the table. Something along the lines of “well, if you can’t tolerate those minimal differences, maybe you’re not the target customer of Apple”. This happened more than a decade ago.

Well almost by definition if one doesn't buy the product, they can be considered "not the target customer". But of course no company is perfect and never succeeds in getting 100% of the customers they intended to get (and conversely they probably get customers they didn't expect). But it's difficult and maybe impossible to know for sure which customers they tried and failed to get and which people they predicted and accepted wouldn't buy the product.

 

[jakey rolling]

Well almost by definition if one doesn't buy the product, they can be considered "not the target customer".

"Target" is the operative word. Whether or not a customer actually buys has nothing to do with whether they are the target customer for a product. Every company that manufactures a product has a particular audience in mind for that product. Whether that audience is actually well-served by the product is a completely different topic.

 

[CSAppleFan]

wow, I didn't even notice that. they slid that under all the other price increases.

 

[jakey rolling]

Let me guess, you're a "Tim Crook" type of guy, and everyone who thinks otherwise is elitist.

Yes to the first part, no to the second. I certainly think Tim Cook has spent his career putting profits ahead of customer value and has earned the "Crook" moniker. I don't think people who like Tim Cook and think he's served Apple's customers well are elitist.

The people I do think are elitist are those who dismiss others who point out bad value propositions as being not part of the intended audience of a product - implying that they, themselves, out of virtue of buying said product, are somehow part of some "in" group. There are plenty of people who would otherwise find value in the PDXDR who would also find the added price of the stand laughably bad value. Implying that someone would have "serious misgivings" about the monitor because they object to paying $1000 for the stand is absolutely elitist.

 

[bapegg]

Wow! That’s double the price I paid for a little N150 miniPC that I bought with a 256GB SSD (which I immediately replaced with a 500GB NVMe) and, wait for it, 12GB of LPDDR5 RAM, last year.

I just looked and I bought my Beelink Mini S13 Pro with the N150, 16 GB of DDR4 SODIMM and a non name 500 GB NVME drive last summer for $168 on Amazon.

Amazon is listing the S13 with the N150, 16 GB of DDR 4 SODIMM and 500 GB NVME is $399

Beelink Mini S13 Mini PC,13th Intel Twin Lake-N150 (up to 3.6GHz, Upgraded N100), 16GB DDR4 500GB M.2 SSD

 

[subjonas]

Whether or not a customer actually buys has nothing to do with whether they are the target customer for a product.

It is relevant, because a target customer isn't that precise--down to the individual person with their individual wants which can change with the wind. A product is aimed at a general target group of faceless customers, and that group is a complicated mix of individuals who can go in and out of being the target. There's no way to know exactly who the target is until they ultimately decide it's the product for them and they buy it. So in a sense, that individual who bought it was the target buyer, but the company didn't and couldn't have known until they bought it.

But again, a company can miss their target group partially or completely.

 

[BeatCrazy]

Yes to the first part, no to the second. I certainly think Tim Cook has spent his career putting profits ahead of customer value and has earned the "Crook" moniker. I don't think people who like Tim Cook and think he's served Apple's customers well are elitist.

The people I do think are elitist are those who dismiss others who point out bad value propositions as being not part of the intended audience of a product - implying that they, themselves, out of virtue of buying said product, are somehow part of some "in" group. There are plenty of people who would otherwise find value in the PDXDR who would also find the added price of the stand laughably bad value. Implying that someone would have "serious misgivings" about the monitor because they object to paying $1000 for the stand is absolutely elitist.

I don't care what you "object to". It's a free market economy and neither I nor Apple care if you're appalled at a $1000 monitor stand.

I'm not the intended customer for a $10M USD yacht, and if someone points that out to me, they're not "elitist" (your characterization), they're just "correct" 🙂

 

[Bazza1]

Really? I always thought of Windows and Android users as the more tech savvy tinkerer types, and Apple users as more of the "just work well so I can get on with my life" types.

There might be a difference between tech-savvy (having to tinker and arm-wrestle Windows and Android to do as you want / need) and tech-savvy (I know what I need a computer to do, and Apple - mostly - does. Or did)? 😉