The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming

[masterbaron]

... and that's the thing you'd think after admitting they hit the thermal envelope with the MacPro they'd be very certain to avoid this issue with the iMacPro - but being rushed to market to cover the gaps and quiet the skeptical they may have boxed themselves in again ... a 4K or even 8K screen would have to be much bigger than that for five thousand dollars .... they'd have to lock me up if any aspect of that configuration was retired in under 5 years ... insane ... or was it insanely great?

 

[Miat]

In the meantime, there were a few encouraging signs. Adding native support in High Sierra for external cpu's is one. A mini with Thunderbolt 3 could now run an external gpu if needed or desired. It's not as good as an integrated solution, but it is definitely a step forward.

It seriously increases flexibility. The very thing that Apple have long been guilty of not providing, especially in their AIOs.

 

[EightyTwenty]

Well, I have to admit Apple proved me wrong.

We got our beloved 5400 spinners in the 4k iMac.

Yup, in the year 2017 Apple will be selling a $1300 all-in-one computer... with a 5400 spinner inside.

Totally speechless at this point. There are no words for how obscene that is. It would have cost them no more than $15 to put some flash in there to make fusion standard. Just disgusts me on all levels.

 

[Cloudsurfer]

Well, I have to admit Apple proved me wrong.

We got our beloved 5400 spinners in the 4k iMac.

Yup, in the year 2017 Apple will be selling a $1300 all-in-one computer... with a 5400 spinner inside.

Totally speechless at this point. There are no words for how obscene that is. It would have cost them no more than $15 to put some flash in there to make fusion standard. Just disgusts me on all levels.

Or they could simply use Flash storage that does not cost a fortune. Why do we need internal flash storage that reads at 2GB/s? Put those in a Pro machine and let the average customer enjoy the benefits of SATA SSD storage, which is fast enough for most of us.

 

[opeter]

Here in the US we can get the 8gb/128gb MacBook Air for $899 (even less on sale). https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1128909-REG/apple_z0rh_mjve1_13_3_macbook_air_notebook.html

$899.00 is €798.48 at current exchange rates. How much more expensive are they in the EU?

Here are the typical prices in Slovenia (EU):
https://www.epl.si/kategorije/mac.html

And these are still old models. The never ones will get to us in August.

 

[Santabean2000]

Or they could simply use Flash storage that does not cost a fortune. Why do we need internal flash storage that reads at 2GB/s? Put those in a Pro machine and let the average customer enjoy the benefits of SATA SSD storage, which is fast enough for most of us.

Exactly.

But even then, really, what's the actual cost to Apple for their fast flash? Seems to be a ridiculous markup...

Lame Apple, lame.

 

[Cape Dave]

Well, I have to admit Apple proved me wrong.

We got our beloved 5400 spinners in the 4k iMac.

Yup, in the year 2017 Apple will be selling a $1300 all-in-one computer... with a 5400 spinner inside.

Totally speechless at this point. There are no words for how obscene that is. It would have cost them no more than $15 to put some flash in there to make fusion standard. Just disgusts me on all levels.

I am speechless. Your average $99 Chrome book has SSD for crying out loud. WTF? So sad. Tim just does not get it. He is clueless.

 

[Ice Dragon]

I am speechless. Your average $99 Chrome book has SSD for crying out loud. WTF? So sad. Tim just does not get it. He is clueless.

I agree however what makes all the iMacs more desirable is the graphics. They are way better than the last time they were updated but I am still only interested in the top model. Also the $1,099 model got a big boost going from Intel HD 5000 to Iris Plus 640.

 

[opeter]

And how is that 2.8 GHz Dual Core CPU? Is is much faster than that in the 2.8 GHz Mac mini?

 

[MRrainer]

They don't want to sell anybody the low-end models without SSD. And the super-decked out high-end models are just meant to sway people into buying the slightly-less-expensive next-best models.

It's a scientifically proven game-theory approach to pricing.

The only anomaly in Apple-land is that a rather large number of people actually go for the "all-options-included"-model.
[doublepost=1496948044][/doublepost]

And how is that 2.8 GHz Dual Core CPU? Is is much faster than that in the 2.8 GHz Mac mini?

The Mini is Haswell, the new iMac has Kaby Lake. That's jumping two generations. Also, Haswell is made in 22nm process, Kaby Lake is 14nm. Raw CPU performance is probably not that much different - maybe 10% per generation or so.
Due to better integrated GPUs and faster SSDs (if you have one... ahem), OS X (sorry: macOS) will feel much faster though.

 

[opeter]

The Mini is Haswell, the new iMac has Kaby Lake. That's jumping two generations. Also, Haswell is made in 22nm process, Kaby Lake is 14nm. Raw CPU performance is probably not that much different - maybe 10% per generation or so.
Due to better integrated GPUs and faster SSDs (if you have one... ahem), OS X (sorry: macOS) will feel much faster though.

Thank you!

 

[treekram]

I don't see why people are wailing about the price of PCIe NVMe 4-lane SSD's vs. SATA. On the most extreme benchmarks, you get 4x from PCIe. It used to be that on some the random access benchmarks, PCIe wasn't that much better but with the newer PCIe SSD's, they're pulling away there as well. So here are some price comparisons today on Amazon: WD 256GB PCIe $128 vs. SATA $90. Toshiba OCZ 512GB PCIe $272 vs. $158 SATA. Samsung 250GB Evo PCIe $128 vs. SATA $106. I was looking at the 850 Evo whereas the 750 Evo is more comparable (chip wise) to the 960 Evo but the 750 Evo actually cost more than it's PCIe counterpart - how crazy is that? Samsung 500/512GB Pro PCIe $325 vs. SATA $258. Typically for the type of performance difference you get between newer vs. older technologies you see now with PCIe vs. SATA, you would expect to pay at least 2x as much, but isn't the case here.

No doubt some people can't take advantage of the speed PCIe brings. And I will say that compared to the price, proprietary connection and soldering in some models of Mac SSD's, a SATA connection is very welcome indeed. But please don't slam the price performance of PCIe NVMe vs. SATA.

 

[tubular]

All I really want is an updated Quad Core....my 2012 is getting a little long in the tooth.

My 2012 quad core is doing fine, and is pretty snappy running off an external SSD via Thunderbolt, but I do worry what would happen if a meteor hit and took it out.

 

[MRrainer]

The problem I have with my 2012-i7 is that I would like to have a newer, larger and faster SSD. Faster for sustained writes. Consumer-SATA-SSDs are getting faster all the time - when loading images or games into memory. Writing on them is no joy:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/consumer-optane-enterprise-ssd-market,34631.html

So, I would have to splash out a quite a hefty sum for a 1 TB Samsung Pro or even an older Intel Enterprise SSD, as the article suggests.
Or buying a cheap, large consumer SSD and Fusion'ing it with an ultra-fast Enterprise SSD (which increasingly don't get released in SATA3-formfactor anymore)

And then, Apple would probably release a new Mini, where the top-end model with maxed-out everything would probably set me back between 1500 and 2000 CHF.

Maybe I'll really have to get back to the iMac at some point. But i7 configurations of that are north of 3000 CHF, too.

 

[Crosscreek]

The problem I have with my 2012-i7 is that I would like to have a newer, larger and faster SSD. Faster for sustained writes. Consumer-SATA-SSDs are getting faster all the time - when loading images or games into memory. Writing on them is no joy:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/consumer-optane-enterprise-ssd-market,34631.html

So, I would have to splash out a quite a hefty sum for a 1 TB Samsung Pro or even an older Intel Enterprise SSD, as the article suggests.
Or buying a cheap, large consumer SSD and Fusion'ing it with an ultra-fast Enterprise SSD (which increasingly don't get released in SATA3-formfactor anymore)

And then, Apple would probably release a new Mini, where the top-end model with maxed-out everything would probably set me back between 1500 and 2000 CHF.

Maybe I'll really have to get back to the iMac at some point. But i7 configurations of that are north of 3000 CHF, too.

I really don't see another Mini in Apples line up. They really are into the AIOs and offer no displays to support headless Macs. Even though they may introduce some sort of modular Mac Pro in the future with a separate display doesn't really mean they need the Mini any longer in their line up.
Your better off going iMac or Hackintosh.

 

[EnesM]

I really don't see another Mini in Apples line up. They really are into the AIOs and offer no displays to support headless Macs. Even though they may introduce some sort of modular Mac Pro in the future with a separate display doesn't really mean they need the Mini any longer in their line up.
Your better off going iMac or Hackintosh.

During the keynote, they clearly said "we updated our WHOLE Mac line up"

Yep, Mac Mini 2014 is almost certainly the last Mini ever...

 

[Ice Dragon]

During the keynote, they clearly said "we updated our WHOLE Mac line up"

Yep, Mac Mini 2014 is almost certainly the last Mini ever...

As a Mac mini fan, I should have been disappointed in Apple. The key words being "should have been." I wasn't because of the graphics options and their memory amounts. The card in the 21.5" iMac is the same one in the 15" MacBook Pro for half the price. The 27" top iMac with the i7, 512 GB SSD, and Applecare and tax in NJ where I am is cheaper than that MacBook Pro as well.

 

[opeter]

I also think, that if they don't update the Mac mini this Fall (October, November), than it is questionable, if there will update it at all. Of that is the case, the Mac mini will get EOLed in 2018.

And yes, the modular Mac Pro will be to expensive for regular folks, that buyed the Mac mini in the past. I don't have any hope, that Apple will sell the comming modular Mac (Pro) under 1000 $/€.

 

[sublunar]

The problem I have with my 2012-i7 is that I would like to have a newer, larger and faster SSD. Faster for sustained writes. Consumer-SATA-SSDs are getting faster all the time - when loading images or games into memory. Writing on them is no joy:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/consumer-optane-enterprise-ssd-market,34631.html

So, I would have to splash out a quite a hefty sum for a 1 TB Samsung Pro or even an older Intel Enterprise SSD, as the article suggests.
Or buying a cheap, large consumer SSD and Fusion'ing it with an ultra-fast Enterprise SSD (which increasingly don't get released in SATA3-formfactor anymore)

And then, Apple would probably release a new Mini, where the top-end model with maxed-out everything would probably set me back between 1500 and 2000 CHF.

Maybe I'll really have to get back to the iMac at some point. But i7 configurations of that are north of 3000 CHF, too.

There will always be people looking to do cut price SSD - most people read SSD and think fast storage but cost reduced versions are not what Apple are into. They've been consistently buying the fastest kinds of PCIe storage for their top of the line Macs and I wouldn't have been surprised if Optane was a possibility for the Kaby Lake desktops.

The price of NAND flash has always come down over time. The apparent acceleration of 'value' options is just feeding the demand from users who see what benefits flash can bring but are unwilling/unable to pay for 'Pro' products. Apple saw the merits of reduced form factor - no longer needing a 2.5" hard drive sized device in their laptops - as well as speed.

All I think will happen in the future is the usual moaning and complaining here when a Dell PC comes with the option for 1Tb of cheap SSD when Apple have the temerity to charge 4x that. They don't see the possibility that Dell buy in the cheap TLC SATA stuff with low lifetime for consumers and cheapskates while Apple continue to buy stuff that's broadly similar to top of the line Samsung 960 Pro in PCIe 3.0 4x format.

Even Samsung have released lower cost variants. The top of the line PRO series has long been joined by the EVO series, the larger capacity units come with the controller from the PRO models to keep performance above their rivals. PC DIY builders wanting performance on a budget will usually buy the Samsung EVO series.

Above all this is Intel's Optane which is currently too power hungry for Apple laptops but still too slow to be used as RAM but might serve as a hyper speed Fusion Drive cache (it currently comes in pricey 16Gb and 32Gb sizes) for desktops.

At the moment only enterprise clients are using Optane so you have to be careful of hype. It sounds more like something the forthcoming Modular Mac Pro might use if they were using Kaby Lake series CPUs (unlikely if Xeons are on the table like the iMac Pro)

 

[Boyd01]

And yes, the modular Mac Pro will be to expensive for regular folks

Seems to me the price will start at $3000, just like the current model. It will be targeted at professional users with money to spend, not hobbyists who like to tinker.... people who want something more powerful than the $5000 iMac Pro.

 

[sublunar]

I also think, that if they don't update the Mac mini this Fall (October, November), than it is questionable, if there will update it at all. Of that is the case, the Mac mini will get EOLed in 2018.

And yes, the modular Mac Pro will be to expensive for regular folks, that buyed the Mac mini in the past. I don't have any hope, that Apple will sell the comming modular Mac (Pro) under 1000 $/€.

At some point Intel will EOL the Haswell CPUs used in the Mac Mini. That won't be for a while but I think the factor for change as far as Apple are concerned is the Thunderbolt 3 slot with the eGPU opportunities going forward.

The Modular Mac Pro is going to start at double that ($2k+) if you look at Windows PC prices - and I mean the custom build quality ones - not built to a budget.

Early 2018 would be the moment for Apple to drop the Mini altogether or do a version with 15w CPUs from the base level 21.5" iMac or base non-touch bar Macbook Pro. The reason for this is the expected time frame for eGPU support to come out of beta. It won't arrive with High Sierra from day 1 so I don't expect a refresh Mini in October.

If the Mini gets a refresh here's what I think we'll have:

2.3GHz i5 with Iris Plus Graphics 640 (with i7 option that does 2.5GHz) which should roughly be on a par with the existing 2014 Haswell powered Iris 5100 units except where sustained periods of turbo are concerned unless Apple engineer a better cooling version within a case that was previously designed to dissipate heat from a 45w quad core CPU. It'll be a more power efficient model too.

If Apple do Coffee Lake refreshes we could see Coffee Lake CPUs arrive for the Mini at the same time as the others. There's been a ripple of interest in alleged 15w four core, eight thread CPUs with Coffee Lake. It'd make for a very interesting Mac Mini server product.

I'm not expecting anything beyond the same form factor with USB-C/Thunderbolt 3 where the TB2 ports were. The iMacs give the clue here and despite the fact that the case could offer room to fit your own 2.5" hard drive or SSD, or your own RAM, Apple have closed that particular door (literally).

With eGPU becoming a possibility I think the way ahead will be for people to buy maxed out Minis and using the Thunderbolt 3 ports to add their own GPU and external drives for storage and additional iO as a super dock. Imagine a Sonnet box containing a GPU and some drive bays for hard drives, taking up both Thunderbolt ports on a 2017 Mini.

The developer eGPU box shown at WWDC is apparently a Sonnet one.

 

[Crosscreek]

With eGPU becoming a possibility I think the way ahead will be for people to buy maxed out Minis and using the Thunderbolt 3 ports to add their own GPU and external drives for storage and additional iO as a super dock. Imagine a Sonnet box containing a GPU and some drive bays for hard drives, taking up both Thunderbolt ports on a 2017 Mini.

That's exactly why you will not see a Mini with TB3. It will eat into iMac sales.

 

[sublunar]

That's exactly why you will not see a Mini with TB3. It will eat into iMac sales.

The 15w CPU would ensure that the iMac won't be threatened except for the 21.5" iMac which also carries the same CPU. At the current rate of change you can expect the 21.5" range to go all retina in time for the next refresh which I expect in early 2018 when Coffee Lake CPUs become available unless Apple are going to turn the base model into a marketing reason for punters to buy the middle model instead.

Assuming ALL iMacs are going Retina, it's a good time to say adios to the lingering Macbook Air (with the non touch bar Macbook Pro 2018 getting a proper price cut to fill that price point) as the last remaining non retina machine in the lineup.

Turn attention to the Mini, then, as the last remaining Thunderbolt 2 model. When Apple release the Modular Mac Pro they'll also have their own range of Thunderbolt 3 displays. I can't see them offering the same 2014 Mini after that with hardware that first come out in 2013 in the Macbook Pros of the time. The hardware would be 4.5 years old by Spring 2018 - surely no way for it to remain a zombie after that.

A majority of folks in here would take a powerful headless modular Mac Pro but would balk at too high a price. For sheer supply chain efficiency, though, we really should have one headless machine with a wide range of options to fit as many budgets as possible.

Look at the 12.9" iPad Pro second generation and 10.5" iPad - are they at a stage where Apple would be comfortable letting the Mini go, especially if iCloud is getting improved during a year of refinement?

 

[Crosscreek]

A majority of folks in here would take a powerful headless modular Mac Pro but would balk at too high a price. For sheer supply chain efficiency, though, we really should have one headless machine with a wide range of options to fit as many budgets as possible.

I don't think Apple cares about competing in the headless market. It remains to be seen if they build an Apple display or have LG build custom displays for them.

As far as an Apple modular Mac Pro I suspect it will be something along the lines of the old cheese grader with many PCIe slots for multiple GPUs and M.2 slots for storage and dual CPU sockets.

It will not be cheap and probably more expensive that the iMac pro with out the display.

 

[MRrainer]

I don't think Apple cares about competing in the headless market. It remains to be seen if they build an Apple display or have LG build custom displays for them.

As far as an Apple modular Mac Pro I suspect it will be something along the lines of the old cheese grader with many PCIe slots for multiple GPUs and M.2 slots for storage and dual CPU sockets.

It will not be cheap and probably more expensive that the iMac pro with out the display.

That's a given ;-)

Well, the 2012-i7 is still good for posting to MacRumors Forum and run the occasional VMWare Fusion VM, so I can't complain ;-)

I think the 2012ers will go "vintage" next year, too? (From an Apple Support point of view).