The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming

[CWallace]

Apple cares about selling the most higher margin/expensive products possible. THAT is the reason they do not produce a quality Mac Mini product.

It doesn't get any simpler than that - they don't want to lose the sale of a SINGLE higher margin/expensive product.

Well if all the units they are selling today were manufactured years ago and are being drawn down from stock stored in a warehouse somewhere, that would support Apple not upgrading it since they need to sell all that remaining stock and if people are willing to pay $499 and up for it, why put it on Clearance and discount it to move it faster?

If, on the other hand, they are still being manufactured today (just in very low volumes) to meet sales demand, one would expect they have a pretty nice margin (at least on a percentage basis) considering how cheap the components should be due to age.

Regardless, Apple would be under no obligation to keep the $499 entry price point for a new "quality" Mac Mini (either once they sell-through existing stock or stop production of the current model). If the base price needed to increase to $599, $699 or even $799 to maintain their desired margin, they would do so.

 

[jasnw]

I am hoping that Apple doesn't see a need for a low-end entry computer to draw people into the Apple ecosystem, which is what the Mini was all about when it debuted. That will only continue production of an inexpensive (relatively speaking) crap-components Mini for this market. I don't think that market exists any longer (if it ever really did). However, the market for a low-end, good-quality, DIY headless system in the $700-$1000 range is, IMHO, a viable one IF you see your company as one that gives a damn about desktop computer users. It remains to be seen how Apple really views itself.

 

[sublunar]

Apple cares about selling the most higher margin/expensive products possible. THAT is the reason they do not produce a quality Mac Mini product.

It doesn't get any simpler than that - they don't want to lose the sale of a SINGLE higher margin/expensive product.

Customer choice, be damned.

Simple solution - Keep a single basic SKU Mac Mini for budget users, allow people to add BTO bits to that as they wish. Restore that full Mac margin with a Mac Mini Pro range topper.

If the iMac Pro is successful as a concept, as with the iPhone X on top of the 8 range, and the iPad Pro on top of the iPad range, then why not sort out a Mac Mini Pro deluxe SKU with all the trimmings already on?

 

[EightyTwenty]

I am hoping that Apple doesn't see a need for a low-end entry computer to draw people into the Apple ecosystem, which is what the Mini was all about when it debuted. That will only continue production of an inexpensive (relatively speaking) crap-components Mini for this market. I don't think that market exists any longer (if it ever really did). However, the market for a low-end, good-quality, DIY headless system in the $700-$1000 range is, IMHO, a viable one IF you see your company as one that gives a damn about desktop computer users. It remains to be seen how Apple really views itself.

Meh. Apple already sells that product. It’s called an iMac.

 

[Sam Luis Obispo]

Simple solution - Keep a single basic SKU Mac Mini for budget users, allow people to add BTO bits to that as they wish. Restore that full Mac margin with a Mac Mini Pro range topper.

If the iMac Pro is successful as a concept, as with the iPhone X on top of the 8 range, and the iPad Pro on top of the iPad range, then why not sort out a Mac Mini Pro deluxe SKU with all the trimmings already on?

Trimmings... You mean like more than one USB port?

 

[jasnw]

Meh. Apple already sells that product. It’s called an iMac.

So, Apple is going to start making headless iMacs? Sounds about right.

 

[Count Blah]

Well if all the units they are selling today were manufactured years ago and are being drawn down from stock stored in a warehouse somewhere, that would support Apple not upgrading it since they need to sell all that remaining stock and if people are willing to pay $499 and up for it, why put it on Clearance and discount it to move it faster?

If, on the other hand, they are still being manufactured today (just in very low volumes) to meet sales demand, one would expect they have a pretty nice margin (at least on a percentage basis) considering how cheap the components should be due to age.

Regardless, Apple would be under no obligation to keep the $499 entry price point for a new "quality" Mac Mini (either once they sell-through existing stock or stop production of the current model). If the base price needed to increase to $599, $699 or even $799 to maintain their desired margin, they would do so.

Bean counter/supply chain guru Tim certainly does not have inventory of Mac Minis lying around. So just scrap that thought.

Apple is gladly trading the $200 they are making per subpar 2014 Mac Mini, to push people towards $300+ they are making on MacBook, iMac, MBP, etc... not sure about MBAir. The claims of not caring about canibalizing their lineup is complete and total BS, as evidence from the Mac Mini.

Even if they increase the price to $599+, we are talking about increased RAM, SSD, upgraded processor to the existing subpar 2014 Mac Mini. That is going to take most, if not all, of that $100 price increase, assuming a 256G SSD. And this updated Mini will certainly take sales away from an iMac.

This is why we are stuck were we are today. Apple cares about $$$ more that offering a compelling product. ONLY, when the mini can be “upgrade” enough to NOT take sales away from higher margin Macs, will we see an update.

I fully expect a 15watt CPU in the Mini, as long as the iMac gets a 35+ watt CPU. And don’t expect to get the 4core/8 thread CPU, for under $999

 

[Cape Dave]

Soon the Ram in the mini will be "old Ram" and therefore the price for that Ram will go up due to the fact that no one is making it anymore. What will Tim do then?

 

[Boyd01]

If the iMac Pro is successful as a concept, as with the iPhone X on top of the 8 range, and the iPad Pro on top of the iPad range, then why not sort out a Mac Mini Pro deluxe SKU with all the trimmings already on?

Those examples aren't quite right.... Apple doesn't make an "iPad Mini Pro".

But the old Mini Server models were basically what you describe. The 2012 2.6ghz i7 quad Mini Server had a geekbench rating of 12,600 while the topo of the line 2012 27" i7 iMac was 13,500. They are still great machines, I love mine. Then Apple discontinued the Mini Server (and also the xServe).

Apple still has a price structure something like this. Top of the line Mini is $2000 and the bottom of the line Pro is $3000.

 

[sublunar]

Those examples aren't quite right.... Apple doesn't make an "iPad Mini Pro".

But the old Mini Server models were basically what you describe. The 2012 2.6ghz i7 quad Mini Server had a geekbench rating of 12,600 while the topo of the line 2012 27" i7 iMac was 13,500. They are still great machines, I love mine. Then Apple discontinued the Mini Server (and also the xServe).

Apple still has a price structure something like this. Top of the line Mini is $2000 and the bottom of the line Pro is $3000.

View attachment 759178 View attachment 759176

Ah but the iPad Mini is a dead product, hasn't been updated in ages - using old CPU - and could be only there to meet a price point. Why would they bother keeping<ahem>

Anyway...

The iMac Pro conceptually includes hardware that isn't currently possible in the regular iMac (as with the iMac Pro) even if the shape looks familiar - iMac Pro has Vega GPU and Xeon CPU for a start - and then doesn't start the base model with poverty spec either.

So, for the sake of argument, how about starting with the familiar case we all know and love

The form factor makes it a popular purchase in volume by the likes of Mac Mini Colo. Just make it space grey - the accessories are available separately now if people want matching stuff.

The inside has been re-engineered with just room for one stick of PCIe SSD (range starting at 512Gb - BTO 1Tb and 2Tb), 16Gb of ECC RAM as standard, 64Gb possible if they use DDR4-2666.

CPU choice is 2.7GHz 6 cores, 12 threads - Xeon E-2176M or 2.9GHz Xeon E-2186M. The CM246 Intel chipset has 24 PCIe channels on the PCH and the Xeon CPU itself has 16. Add 4 Thunderbolt ports hanging off the CPU. Possibly 6 in total if we're getting rid of the internal PSU in favour of USB-C power from an adaptor. Use the rest for Wifi, USB controllers (1 per port), 10-Gig Ethernet, HDMI 2.0, and so on.

The extra space vacated by the hard drives houses the better cooling solution because it could be running hotter DDR4 RAM and SSD. The Mini Pro comes with no dGPU - you buy into eGPU if you need better and external storage available via break out boxes.

The base price obviously around $2-2.5k which would pique the interest of the 2013 Mac Pro buyers but if BTO ends around $3-4k then the Modular Mac Pro can easily start north of $4k or more depending on the philosophy around it.

 

[Partron22]

They could fit a lot in a round cornered 8X8X8" aluminum cube these days. With that much room there'd be space for swappable memory, GPU, CPU's etc. etc. Not much more desk space used than today's minis. Who puts books on top of them? But a world of large cheap, perhaps not even surface soldered boards and connectors.
At 1% of sales. I doubt Apple is interested.

 

[jasnw]

Soon the Ram in the mini will be "old Ram" and therefore the price for that Ram will go up due to the fact that no one is making it anymore. What will Tim do then?

Obvious - charge more for the 2014 Mini (this was a trick question, right?).

 

[CWallace]

Bean counter/supply chain guru Tim certainly does not have inventory of Mac Minis lying around. So just scrap that thought.

So that means people are still buying them in sufficient quantities to keep a supply chain going, even with how "woeful" they are. I don't know what the minimum Run Rate for Quanta or Foxconn is, but I expect it's more than a handful.

Even if they increase the price to $599+, we are talking about increased RAM, SSD, upgraded processor to the existing subpar 2014 Mac Mini. That is going to take most, if not all, of that $100 price increase, assuming a 256G SSD. And this updated Mini will certainly take sales away from an iMac.

Well then they would charge $699 to get that margin to be the same as the iMac. And even the entry-level iMac has a dGPU which a Mac Mini is not going to have so people using their Macs for graphics-intensive tasks in macOS will still be generally pushed to the iMac over a better Mac Mini.

This is why we are stuck were we are today. Apple cares about $$$ more that offering a compelling product. ONLY, when the mini can be “upgrade” enough to NOT take sales away from higher margin Macs, will we see an update.

And yet they still sell the fairly cheaper 2015 MacBook Pro, which many believe is a better machine then the 2016-2017 models.

 

[giggles]

Apple’s line up of products is like a multi story store where you have floor 1 with a very slender and clean and minimal line up of the latest products (a far cry from the product code salad and confusing/redundant line up of other manufacturers), but then you dig deeper and you find a basement with some previous models, a repair shop with tons of multi generation refurbs, a janitor closet with some random very old product to cater to a very particular audience (think the superdrive-and-replaceable-HDD 13” 2012 Ivy Bridge MBP, how long was that in the line up), so under the surface there’s room for a lot (apparently random, but only because we can’t see the whole picture) of “just in case”-ing.

Like, try guessing quickly and without googling how many models of iPhone Apple sells at the moment, including previous gens.

It’s like an onion, it has layers. Hence a 4 year old Mini at full price can totally be a thing. Or the already mentioned A8 iPad Mini.

 

[Miat]

And yet they still sell the fairly cheaper 2015 MacBook Pro

If I had some spare cash – Hah! – I would grab a 2015 MBP 15" from the refurb shop. Currently listed at $2499 here (Australia), with a 256GB SSD, and iGPU only (Iris Pro, I think).

Stick in a 3rd party 1TB SSD, and it is just about the perfect laptop for me.

 

[giggles]

(continuing from my previous line of reasoning)
Who shapes such a line up? Forces like market, profit, internal power struggles. What could counter these forces in the case of an “orphan” product? The “halo” or “culture” argument. Having a fast current Mini around not because it’s profitable, but because it’s a cultural thing. It caters to Mac aficionados and tinkerers. That could be a reasonable argument from a Mini lover.

Another interesting thing that Apple once said: you know what huge corporation heavily (but not exclusively of course) relies on Macs in its day to day operations? Apple itself. Apparently not Minis at the moment. Or maybe yes and 2014 Minis are up for the task.

 

[EightyTwenty]

So, Apple is going to start making headless iMacs? Sounds about right.

No need to. They sell iMacs in that price range already. I guess you could remove the screen if you want.

 

[Cape Dave]

Obvious - charge more for the 2014 Mini (this was a trick question, right?).

LOL, you passed the trick! Charging more for less value is the correct answer!

 

[Neodym]

They could fit a lot in a round cornered 8X8X8" aluminum cube these days. With that much room there'd be space for swappable memory, GPU, CPU's etc. etc. [...]
At 1% of sales. I doubt Apple is interested.

Apple never officially ended production of the Cube (it's "suspended"), so it would be really nice to give it a 2nd life with up-to-date (or whatever Apple deems to be sufficiently up-to-date) innards. Would surely bring lots of attention and media coverage.

Unfortunately that'd be too bold a move, which they'd probably wouldn't dare taking. Besides, the current design language at Apple goes more towards circles than squares, so the best one could probably hope for would be a re-use the tube design of the 2013 Mac Pro.

Being really consequential, they would need to make it a globe, but that approach would not fit the efficiency mantra of the bean counters. I can't imagine the current Apple to take such risks and try something really new in the domain of desktop computers. Or does anyone know of any mainstream computer (now or past) in the form of a true globe?

 

[giggles]

motherboards are flat
SoCs are flat
flash storage is flat
aftermarket macmini VESA mounts looks better if it’s flat
no reason to make any Mac (except the new MacPro) not flat

only possible reason would be designing it with the mother of all wifi/bt antenna arrays for supreme wireless performances

that could use vertical space

 

[Neodym]

motherboards are flat
SoCs are flat
flash storage is flat

... and still they made the base unit of the old "lamp" iMac (nearly) a half-globe. And it still looks better than more recent incarnations from competitors with a square base unit. "Looks" is a very important factor for a significant portion of Apple customers.

What you say is completely valid and true, but it reflects exactly the efficiency mantra I mentioned. Of course most components are flat, but that doesn't mean you couldn't make use of that additional space in a spherical housing (or any other non-flat, non-square housing for that matter), e.g. for a PCIe graphic card, silent cooling system, drive bays, speaker resonance room etc. - Think different!

Could also help to differentiate from the competition with its all-flat-and-square philosophy.

 

[Cape Dave]

Apple admitted that they boxed themselves into a corner with the Mac Pro Cylinder. So, they will not be using that again, ever. Instant Classic.

 

[jasnw]

Now that we're all thinking outside the "box" design, how about a Power Pyramid shape? That will bring on board the entire Illuminati market as well as 90% of the people living in and around Sedona, AZ.

 

[Cape Dave]

Now that we're all thinking outside the "box" design, how about a Power Pyramid shape? That will bring on board the entire Illuminati market as well as 90% of the people living in and around Sedona, AZ.

And... it will keep your razor blades sharp, LOL!

 

[CWallace]

Now that we're all thinking outside the "box" design, how about a Power Pyramid shape? That will bring on board the entire Illuminati market as well as 90% of the people living in and around Sedona, AZ.

Well Scimitar Computers offers their Vertex Pyramid Case so maybe Apple could be inspired by that.

And I could have sworn Apollo Computer's desk-side workstations in the mid-to-late 1980s were vaguely pyramidal in shape, but I can't find any images of such a thing so my memory must be failing.