The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming

[Micky Do]

Actually, the Refurb section of Apple's online store has been flooded with every Mac except the Mini (which had two gluts in the past few months). My guess is a sweeping refresh of the product line is coming, with minor updates to the 2015 iMac line also possible.

That would be my guess too, if not next month then later this year.

 

[Crosscreek]

The new Mac Mini is almost certainly coming ....Core M, rose gold.....1 port.



It will be Magical.......everyone will need one!!!!🙂

 

[Serban]

and but in this case, since mac mini doesnt have an integrated display, it will be a pocketable device

 

[janitor3]

and but in this case, since mac mini doesnt have an integrated display, it will be a pocketable device

Do you mean it will be an "iPhone MacMini 7 Pro".???? 🙂

 

[Altis]

Macrumors forum be like
> "95% of people only need iPad/Core M for their needs"
> "Your 2012 $3000 computer is obsolete"

(unless it's the Mac Pro of course since the current one still uses 2012 parts)

 

[Chrystal Ocean]

Actually, the Refurb section of Apple's online store has been flooded with every Mac except the Mini (which had two gluts in the past few months). My guess is a sweeping refresh of the product line is coming, with minor updates to the 2015 iMac line also possible.

Same on Canada refurb site. Been a glut of minis recently. Apple seems unable to clear these 3; they've been around for over a week:

The middle one disappeared for a day then was back. Either the potential buyer changed her mind or a credit app didn't go through. Am betting the former. Note that only one of those shows a discount.

 

[macsforme]

For heaven's sake, Apple...

I will GIVE YOU MY MONEY... just please, offer my a product that fits my needs!

Put BACK the dedicated GPU option; put BACK the quad-core CPU option; put BACK the user-upgradable RAM slot (I would ask you to put BACK the optical drive if I hadn't completely given up hope on that). Why do you intentionally remove value from your products?

Yes, I realize that soldering the RAM to the logic board 1) forces customers to pay your exorbitant RAM upgrade prices up front, and 2) reduces the usable lifespan of low-spec'd machines, theoretically reducing the average time between upgrades. Was this your goal? Way to show your customers that you see us as nothing but nickels and dimes!

Oh, and since you're so "green" and environment oriented in some areas, why don't you embrace it fully and reduce e-waste by making your machines more user-serviceable and upgradable. Massive amounts of glue, proprietary screws, no user-serviceable parts... we can all see the hypocrisy.

 

[BeatCrazy]

For heaven's sake, Apple...

I will GIVE YOU MY MONEY... just please, offer my a product that fits my needs!

Put BACK the dedicated GPU option; put BACK the quad-core CPU option; put BACK the user-upgradable RAM slot (I would ask you to put BACK the optical drive if I hadn't completely given up hope on that). Why do you intentionally remove value from your products?

Apple offers this, it's called the Mac Pro.

 

[navaira]

Yes, I realize that soldering the RAM to the logic board 1) forces customers to pay your exorbitant RAM upgrade prices up front, and 2) reduces the usable lifespan of low-spec'd machines, theoretically reducing the average time between upgrades. Was this your goal? Way to show your customers that you see us as nothing but nickels and dimes!

I kind of thing that yes, that's what the goal is :/ I think it's shocking that people spend thousands of euros on super beautiful thin computers with spinner drives inside that can't be upgraded other than adding external drives. And I also think it's suicidal tactic long-term. Burn your customers once or twice, lose them to bloody Dell.

Apple offers this, it's called the Mac Pro.

Have you checked the price vs specs on this one recently?

 

[DesertSurfer]

For heaven's sake, Apple...

I will GIVE YOU MY MONEY... just please, offer my a product that fits my needs!

Put BACK the dedicated GPU option; put BACK the quad-core CPU option; put BACK the user-upgradable RAM slot (I would ask you to put BACK the optical drive if I hadn't completely given up hope on that). Why do you intentionally remove value from your products?

Yes, I realize that soldering the RAM to the logic board 1) forces customers to pay your exorbitant RAM upgrade prices up front, and 2) reduces the usable lifespan of low-spec'd machines, theoretically reducing the average time between upgrades. Was this your goal? Way to show your customers that you see us as nothing but nickels and dimes!

Oh, and since you're so "green" and environment oriented in some areas, why don't you embrace it fully and reduce e-waste by making your machines more user-serviceable and upgradable. Massive amounts of glue, proprietary screws, no user-serviceable parts... we can all see the hypocrisy.

Or, if you (Apple) won't do any of this, maybe a 5 1/4" floppy drive?

 

[BeatCrazy]

Have you checked the price vs specs on this one recently?

Of course, I own one. As well as a Late 2014 Mac mini. By my math (and applicable to US), the "premium" Apple charges to get everything you wanted (dedicated graphics, upgradeable memory, quad core) is about $1500 USD.

You may feel that is too steep. However, that is the price Apple has set, and they're giving you exactly what you're asking for. I realize it's not in the price range you're looking for, but the same could be said about virtually any product. Have I mentioned how I want a stainless steel Apple Watch for $199?

 

[Altis]

Of course, I own one. As well as a Late 2014 Mac mini. By my math (and applicable to US), the "premium" Apple charges to get everything you wanted (dedicated graphics, upgradeable memory, quad core) is about $1500 USD.

You may feel that is too steep. However, that is the price Apple has set, and they're giving you exactly what you're asking for. I realize it's not in the price range you're looking for, but the same could be said about virtually any product. Have I mentioned how I want a stainless steel Apple Watch for $199?

What an absurd position to take on it. There's no excuse to charge such an extreme premium over market value other than to shaft those who are committed to the 'ecosystem'.

Having to pay north of $3000 just to get a quad core CPU (which have been the norm for what, 8 years now?)... and even then, the MP has 2.5 year old hardware.

The whole "well that's the price so if you don't like it don't buy it!" is utterly meaningless. We all knows that's the price, and we know we don't have to buy it, but it's such a slap in the face to those who have invested and committed to a company so happy to either rip you off if you choose to stay with them. It becomes difficult to support a company that acts in that manner.

 

[tokyodan]

Funny how everytime Mac Mini refabs show up on Apple's refab page, a few days later they disappear and similar ones show up on Amazon Japan's marketplace being sold by various electronics 'shops' for higher prices. I hate people that do that. But I guess that is capitalism in action.

 

[Micky Do]

Funny how everytime Mac Mini refabs show up on Apple's refab page, a few days later they disappear and similar ones show up on Amazon Japan's marketplace being sold by various electronics 'shops' for higher prices. I hate people that do that. But I guess that is capitalism in action.

Nothing like a bit of good llld fashioned arbitrage, eh. Helps clear the decks for the new Mac Mini, not that many who chime in here seem to give a hoot these days.

 

[Lankyman]

6,822 posts to date, nowhere near a million.

Nearly a million views though suggesting that there is a certain amount of interest in the Mac Mini and OS X that you delight in disparaging.

You think my comments are disparaging given it's little better than a tablet in terms of power and flexibility. If a Windows OM came up with something like the current Mini it would be slammed and I'm sure you realise this to be true.

 

[Micky Do]

You think my comments are disparaging given it's little better than a tablet in terms of power and flexibility. If a Windows OM came up with something like the current Mini it would be slammed and I'm sure you realise this to be true.

Might be of concern to a demanding dilettante on a budget.

For the average Joe or Jill of modest means, who just wants to do stuff with minimal hassle using OS X, the Mac Mini can be had in a range of specs to suit a range of needs.

Need more grunt? There is the Mac Pro….. A mate of mine stumped up for one a couple of years ago, and remains well pleased with it. He also has a couple of Mac Minis in his household (including a 2014) and a MacBook Pro, a couple of iPhones and an iPad or two, all integrated.

Like mucking around with IT hardware and software? Want bragging rights to the latest, meanest, fastest hardware your side of town? Don't like OS X? The Mac Mini is not for you.

Clearly you have zilch interest in the new Mac Mini, that is almost certainly coming. Really, do you think anybody gives a hoot?

 

[Lankyman]

Might be of concern to a demanding dilettante on a budget.

For the average Joe or Jill of modest means, who just wants to do stuff with minimal hassle using OS X, the Mac Mini can be had in a range of specs to suit a range of needs.

Need more grunt? There is the Mac Pro….. A mate of mine stumped up for one a couple of years ago, and remains well pleased with it. He also has a couple of Mac Minis in his household (including a 2014) and a MacBook Pro, a couple of iPhones and an iPad or two, all integrated.

Like mucking around with IT hardware and software? Want bragging rights to the latest, meanest, fastest hardware your side of town? Don't like OS X? The Mac Mini is not for you.

Clearly you have zilch interest in the new Mac Mini, that is almost certainly coming. Really, do you think anybody gives a hoot?

I'll ignore the continued insults. If you are on a budget then you would hardly be looking at a Mac Mini would you? The fact remains it's old tech at 2016 prices and the tech is pretty underwhelming at that. To get around this fact you then start talking about buying a Mac Pro and this in a Mac Mini forum that you keep trying to defend.

Why should Apple ever consider upping their game with the Mini when they have apologists like yourself tub thumping for them?

 

[BeatCrazy]

What an absurd position to take on it. There's no excuse to charge such an extreme premium over market value other than to shaft those who are committed to the 'ecosystem'.

Having to pay north of $3000 just to get a quad core CPU (which have been the norm for what, 8 years now?)... and even then, the MP has 2.5 year old hardware.

The whole "well that's the price so if you don't like it don't buy it!" is utterly meaningless. We all knows that's the price, and we know we don't have to buy it, but it's such a slap in the face to those who have invested and committed to a company so happy to either rip you off if you choose to stay with them. It becomes difficult to support a company that acts in that manner.

This is a good mentality. For 2005.

Having integrated graphics, RAM, and mid-level CPU offerings is targeting the 95% of users who will be more than satisfied. Adding the flexibility for a dedicated GPU, replaceable RAM, etc. just means you're designing a box that needs more power and parts, and usually less performance. What kind of user replaceable, low voltage RAM should go in a Mac mini? And to appease the 2% that can't make do with 8GB? If you need 32/64GB of RAM, you are doing serious work, and you need to step up to the Mac Pro or assemble a Hackintosh if you're budget conscious. Same with the SSD. Should we give up read/write speeds by going back to SATA III connectors in the Mac mini? And how many <$1K computer buyers can't make do with the current integrated GPU options from Intel? Need more GPU horsepower = go with Mac Pro or Windows box. In 2005, anything below a $100 GPU was garbage for even surfing the web. That's not the case any longer.

This is the new reality, get used to it. And given the Mac's marketshare improvement ever since they pivoted to this strategy, things won't change. And I'm fine with it, because I've gotten much better performance with each generation of Macs, even if I can tinker with them less. If I sleep better at night knowing I can upgrade xyz part sometime down the road, I can just fool around with my Windows box.

 

[jpietrzak8]

Having integrated graphics, RAM, and mid-level CPU offerings is targeting the 95% of users who will be more than satisfied. Adding the flexibility for a dedicated GPU, replaceable RAM, etc. just means you're designing a box that needs more power and parts, and usually less performance.

Ok, that's fine. Just be prepared for desktop computers to now be replaced every 2-3 years, just like the current cycle for locked-in, non-upgradeable cellphones. The OS resource requirements, at least for Apple, are making entry-level computers unusable long, long before the hardware goes bad...

 

[Santabean2000]

It just comes down to the fact Apple has changed. And not for the better. Hard to swallow seeing an old friend turn into a jerk.

I think they're going to have to see harder times before they have any chance of changing direction again. We need to stop buying Macs until they do; my 'newest' Mac is from 2012...

 

[BeatCrazy]

Ok, that's fine. Just be prepared for desktop computers to now be replaced every 2-3 years, just like the current cycle for locked-in, non-upgradeable cellphones. The OS resource requirements, at least for Apple, are making entry-level computers unusable long, long before the hardware goes bad...

Kind of a non-starter, because the entry level desktop PC market has been crashing for years, thanks to mobile phones and tablets.

 

[Lankyman]

This is a good mentality. For 2005.

Having integrated graphics, RAM, and mid-level CPU offerings is targeting the 95% of users who will be more than satisfied. Adding the flexibility for a dedicated GPU, replaceable RAM, etc. just means you're designing a box that needs more power and parts, and usually less performance. What kind of user replaceable, low voltage RAM should go in a Mac mini? And to appease the 2% that can't make do with 8GB? If you need 32/64GB of RAM, you are doing serious work, and you need to step up to the Mac Pro or assemble a Hackintosh if you're budget conscious. Same with the SSD. Should we give up read/write speeds by going back to SATA III connectors in the Mac mini? And how many <$1K computer buyers can't make do with the current integrated GPU options from Intel? Need more GPU horsepower = go with Mac Pro or Windows box. In 2005, anything below a $100 GPU was garbage for even surfing the web. That's not the case any longer.

This is the new reality, get used to it. And given the Mac's marketshare improvement ever since they pivoted to this strategy, things won't change. And I'm fine with it, because I've gotten much better performance with each generation of Macs, even if I can tinker with them less. If I sleep better at night knowing I can upgrade xyz part sometime down the road, I can just fool around with my Windows box.

Can you point me to the source that states 95% are/will be more than satisfied with Apple's hardware in the Mini? Could you also point me to the source that states only 2% can't make do with 8 gigs of RAM?

You bluster on about all these hardware peripheral statistics yet you fail to mention that Intel and their diminutive NUC are able to achieve what Apple aren't willing to or can't plus a host of other manufactures. Should you wish it I can furnish you with the names of those companies.

I will accept that Iris Pro graphics would do very nicely in a Mini, oh just remembered though, that isn't on offer, I was thinking about the NUC. 🙁
[doublepost=1463401082][/doublepost]

It just comes down to the fact Apple has changed. And not for the better. Hard to swallow seeing an old friend turn into a jerk.

I think they're going to have to see harder times before they have any chance of changing direction again. We need to stop buying Macs until they do; my 'newest' Mac is from 2012...

Mines mid-2011 - the good old days. This is likely to be my last.

 

[jpietrzak8]

Can you point me to the source that states 95% are/will be more than satisfied with Apple's hardware in the Mini? Could you also point me to the source that states only 2% can't make do with 8 gigs of RAM?

My own guess is that these rough 95% or 2% estimates are probably close to the truth, when I look at my mother's use of her Mini: she's just using it for web, e-mail, and casual gaming. I suspect the vast majority of Apple's target audience are using their machines in a similar manner.

The real issue here, though, is that nobody has ever needed to perform such an analysis, because computer buyers have never before been locked into a specific configuration. Apple has always provided fewer hardware options and less flexibility than its competitors, but until recently, you could still make modifications to a machine's RAM or drives.

Long story short: in the past, if a machine was inadequate to your needs, you could take measures to fix it. With Apple's current lineup, your only option is pitch out your current machine and buy a new one.

 

[BeatCrazy]

Can you point me to the source that states 95% are/will be more than satisfied with Apple's hardware in the Mini? Could you also point me to the source that states only 2% can't make do with 8 gigs of RAM?

You bluster on about all these hardware peripheral statistics yet you fail to mention that Intel and their diminutive NUC are able to achieve what Apple aren't willing to or can't plus a host of other manufactures. Should you wish it I can furnish you with the names of those companies.

I will accept that Iris Pro graphics would do very nicely in a Mini, oh just remembered though, that isn't on offer, I was thinking about the NUC. 🙁
[doublepost=1463401082][/doublepost]

Mines mid-2011 - the good old days. This is likely to be my last.

You guys keep wanting to buy a loaded-up Chevy Malibu and expect it to perform like a Corvette. Except you can't spec a Malibu like that, or a Mac mini.

Enjoy your mid-2011 mini. I had one as well. Upgraded everything I could, with high performance RAM and SSD. My Late 2014 with "fixed" everything outperforms the 2011, and is far less glitchy.

 

[jpietrzak8]

You guys keep wanting to buy a loaded-up Chevy Malibu and expect it to perform like a Corvette. Except you can't spec a Malibu like that, or a Mac mini.

Enjoy your mid-2011 mini. I had one as well. Upgraded everything I could, with high performance RAM and SSD. My Late 2014 with "fixed" everything outperforms the 2011, and is far less glitchy.

And you guys seem so willing to dump your current computer and buy another one every few years. 🙂 I have just barely upgraded my 2007 and 2010 Minis (to keep up with OS requirements, mainly), and they still work perfectly for my needs. Neither has ever been "glitchy"...