The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming

[calvz]

The problem is that Apple needs to take a more modern and nuanced look at the role people are expecting a computer to fill in their lives.

They bill the iPad as a computer replacement. For me, an iPad has taken over about 90% of what I'd nomally do with a computer. That leaves working remotely, paying bills, anything requiring a printer, and casual gaming. I've got a 27" monitor that I currently hook up to an old MBP for work because I need the screen real estate. But the bottom line is I don't do enough with the computer to justify dropping $1800 on a 27 inch iMac. If Apple wants to update the Mini - with TB3 it's an ideal modular, expandable machine - I'm all about buying one. If not, I'll just buy a sub-$1,000 PC. But all told, I'd much rather use MacOS than Windows, and I appreciate that MacOS integrates with all of the other Apple products I own.

Which leads me to my next point - ecosystem. It's not just about the margin for a particular product. Lower prices mean access, and access gets people into the Apple ecosystem, which is what Apple really wants. You need look no further than the reinvigoration of the iPad platform since the cheaper 2017 model came out. Maybe an Android phone user buys an iPad or a Mac Mini. That Android user is probably going to be more likely to buy an iPhone the next time. the reverse is also true. Say I decide as a longtime Mac user to make my next computer a PC (a distinct possibility given the current options). Next time I get a new phone, maybe I look at the Android because I want Android Auto in my car since Apple's been so damn stubborn about allowing Waze on Carplay. Next thing you know, they've lost me as a customer completely.

Finally, looking at sales of the existing model is a complete waste. It hasn't been updated since 2014 - of course people aren't going to buy it.

 

[ignatius345]

Wouldn't mind moving up to 4K @ 60Hz

Retina support was what made me finally upgrade from Mini to iMac. That and needing to move past USB 2.0. Otherwise, honestly, the Mini was doing just fine -- and still is chugging away on my wife's desk. If I hadn't gotten greedy for pixels, I'd probably be using it right now.

 

[Partron22]

still is chugging away on my wife's desk

At least give her a little firewire 800 ssd. Halved boot time on my wife's mini, and sped up apps a bunch too (el cap - Sierra)

 

[MRrainer]

Apple probably makes more money selling cases for iPads than Minis. The amount they make on Minis - I'm not sure if it even registered on the bottom-line. But that's really because the iPhone is so frickin' huge.

If the Mini would disappear, I'd have to look at the iMac. I would just hope that it lives long enough. Repairs out of Apple Care are ridiculously expensive on these.

Depending on my needs at the time, I may also go MBP. I currently have absolutely no need for one, but this may change.

 

[ignatius345]

At least give her a little firewire 800 ssd. Halved boot time on my wife's mini, and sped up apps a bunch too (el cap - Sierra)

Oh yeah, I crammed an SSD into it years ago in addition to the existing HDD to make a DIY fusion drive.

It was a dramatic improvement that added several years of usable life to the machine. It's running High Sierra now without issue, and I've done plenty of Photoshop, Illustrator and even Final Cut stuff on it without a hitch. She basically just uses it for Outlook, Word, web stuff. Unless something breaks, I could see it going a few more years easily.

 

[Neodym]

But if Apple kills the Mini, there's probably an iMac in my future. It's just not that big of a deal for me, all of my screens are 1080p (or less), so I'm not against the idea of an "all in one" machine.

At the same time, on the other side of the world, I am using an 21:9 3440x1440 monitor I simply don't want to replace with any iMac ever offered. Also, the idle power consumption of a mini is unbeaten by any desktop offering from Apple. Important for a machine doing server duties in the background 24/7.

MAC revenue, all of ‘em, accounts for a whopping ten percent of Apple’s products and services. The lil’ Mini likely then is barely 0.001% of revenue. We see where Apple’s emphasis is going and it’s not for desktop machines anymore.

The iDevices work so well for Apple, because there is an ecosystem based on Macs in the background. IIRC you can't even develop for iOS without a Mac. And I'd estimate that many iDevice purchasing decisions have been based on influencers one way or the other.

If influencers don't get proper Macs anymore and lack the comfortable ecosystem, they may look elsewhere and it becomes harder for them to recommend iOS devices to their families, friends or readers (think of blogs/magazines).

And no - neither an iMac nor a laptop is a proper replacement for a (comparably) much less expensive desktop machine.

 

[Count Blah]

Which leads me to my next point - ecosystem. It's not just about the margin for a particular product.

Sorry, but it is ALL about margins for Apple. Pushing customers to more expensive options with higher margins.

Margins >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Customer choice

 

[sublunar]

Well, if Apple thought they could build a headless system with good spec for $2k and sell it for decent margin I think they would (notwithstanding the impact on similarly priced iMacs). I have seen enough average Joe users to understand why the iMac and laptops are attractive. You'd be surprised at how many people don't want unsightly cables or having to plug A into B. If headless Macs for professionals are the target then they need to price it upwards. A poverty spec $500 machine isn't likely to thrill too many serious professionals. A Max BTO build 2014 Mac Mini is certainly not worth the money when compared to a 2017 iMac, never mind a 2018 one which will be inevitable.

 

[jasnw]

Not all "serious professionals" need an expensive box with the latest/hottest CPU and GPU, nor do they need the latest 4K monitor. You are, however, correct that a $500 box isn't likely to be usable, but a $1000 box can be built that would be pretty respectable and usable in a lot of "professional" settings. System76 can do this, so why can't (or won't) Apple? If Apple doesn't want to support this user segment with hardware, they should at least make macOS more easily ported to 3rd-party hardware. Hackintoshes are at least as much, if not more, hassle that Linux used to be, and I don't want to have to worry about my hardware coming to a screeching halt because I had to update the OS for a security issue and that update just also happened to break some tweak required for the Hackintosh implementation to work. I'd even settle for a return to a separate Darwin organization that would keep an open-source version of macOS going, with the focus on the OS guts and not the windowing system. In fact, being able to run a light-weight window manager on top of a macOS structure would be very useful in many situations. OK, now I'm dreaming again - where's the ROI in that?

 

[toke lahti]

Not all "serious professionals" need an expensive box with the latest/hottest CPU and GPU, nor do they need the latest 4K monitor.

Well, if you buy ANY mac, you can be pretty sure, that it won’t have either of those!
I buy a desktop computer with idea of it could be used for 10 years.
Do you see yourself using 4k in 5 years from now?

I’d guess normal for now is 2.5k, 5 years ago it was fullHD, iirc.

 

[masterbaron]

I've noticed with the advent of HD on broadcast TV that most shots are close-up (the camera is always focused tight) which means much of the peripheral content is now not shown unless its a nature program - the cameras are all too close for me making the experience detailed but limited and boring. It seems non-HD content has a wider field of vision which for me is more entertaining. More specifically, HD TV shows are very close-up but HD movies are not as bad. The whole quest for pixels for TV viewing is now more than I can appreciate.

I have to admit my legacy setup may be the last stop for a good while - I'll clone this version on my machine for backup and just wait until something compelling surfaces that meets my needs.

I thought equipment manufacturers were lawfully required to provide parts for their computers for 10-years - crimping the software is what enables them to bounce you out of a particular model apparently- so hoping for 10 years of use aint gonna happen unless you want to be legacy.

 

[slooksterPSV]

I'm almost 99% sure that the new Mac Mini will be here either this year or next. My guess is it will include an A12 CPU by Apple and run more of a meshed iOS macOS experience. The current mini line is terrible for performance. =(

 

[Synchro3]

I just want something stationary with at least 4 cores and without monitor, and the GPU should have 4K 60Hz capability. eGPU is no problem, if the internal GPU is weak, so Thunderbolt 3 is needed.

Is it so difficult to produce something like that?

And no, the current Mac Mini (old, Dual Core, Thunderbolt 2, no 4K 60) and nMac Pro (so old, problematic GPU's, Thunderbolt 2) is no alternative.

And I want this machine BEFORE macOS introduces 64 Bit enforcement.

Gosh.

 

[Miat]

eGPU is no problem, if the internal GPU is weak, so Thunderbolt 3 is needed.

I think current generation iGPUs are good enough for most purposes and users. Only people needing serious GPU grunt are gamers and some pro users, and eGPU covers that.

 

[andrewmarich]

Fingers crossed that it eventuates

 

[sublunar]

Consider the relative value for money of a base model 21.5" 2018 iMac if it comes with a 6 core i5-8400 2.8GHz Coffee Lake CPU. My assumption is that the 2018 iMac update sees the entire line go Retina and the base model will adopt the same base level CPU. The mid model would come with i5-8500 which is the same 3GHz as the current mid model iMac but with 6 cores. The highest SKU 2018 iMac could have a speed reduction against its 2017 equivalent - 3.1GHz i5-8600 vs 3.4GHz i5-7500 but again the 6 cores will help mitigate this.

The lineup emulates the arrangement for the mature all-retina 27-inch line.

But what about Apple going all retina for the 21.5" range but continuing to justify a low-ish priced base model with a different base CPU? Next examples include tax (US prices don't):
In the UK, off the shelf, the highest SKU 2014 Mac Mini is £949. The base model iMac 2018 could get a price bump due to a retina screen to £1099 (against £1049 for the 2017 base model which uses the current non touch bar MacBook Pro CPU). In lieu of the absence of a Coffee Lake equivalent CPU with upgraded Iris Graphics 640, Apple have a choice of 3 CPUs for the base model:

Why discuss iMac CPUs in this thread? Well, we have the unusual situation of Apple using MacBook Air CPUs that could have gone into the Mac Mini in successive base model iMacs now.

The 2015 iMac 21.5" base model used the 1.6GHz i5-5250U with HD6000 graphics in October 2015.
The 2017 iMac 21.5" base model used the 2.3GHz i5-7360U with Iris Graphics 640 in June 2017. These models came with Thunderbolt 3 ports.

Both of these base model iMacs power non retina 1080HD displays and it's feasible that Apple may want more GPU grunt to power a 4k display. Remember, though, that they considered a desktop Iris Pro 6200 iGPU perfectly fine for the original 4k iMac.

It's a mystery why the Mac Mini was never given these CPUs in the intervening years and now we're at a situation where the base model iMac may have to power a 4k screen we may have a CPU in a Retina iMac that might be suitable for

i5-8250U - 1.6GHz Quad Core, 8 threads with UHD620 graphics - only likely to be used in a MacBook Air which powers a non retina display, never mind 4k. Although Apple could choose to pair this with an AMD GPU.
i3-8109U - 3GHz dual core, 4 threads with Iris Plus Graphics 655 - in the absence of a 15w CPU with Iris Graphics this could power a 4k display and, separately, a non touch bar MacBook Pro if that is to be updated in June at WWDC. Could be confusing for the marketing folks with relatively high clock speed but 2 fewer cores.
i5-8259U - 2.3GHz quad core, 8 threads with Iris Plus Graphics 655 - a 28w CPU destined for the MacBook Pro with touch bar. It fits in best with the iMac range with the next CPU up at 2.8GHz 6 cores as mentioned earlier.

And another way that Apple could go is to use the i5-8305G across the board and vary the storage options:
This packaged solution is 2.8GHz 4 cores, 8 threads, and starts with VEGA M GL graphics within a 65w package - the top model could come with a 100w version of the i7. Obviously there could be some interesting benchmarks if Apple went this way against using Coffee Lake i5 CPUs with 6 cores and no threads and more powerful AMD GPU for the 27" models.

Back to our choice of three mobile CPUs, then, and note that the i3-8109U is socket compatible with the i5-8259U, but NOT with the i5-8250U so we can't a 2018 Mac Mini on the same motherboard with options that include with i58250U AND either the i3-8109U or i5-8259U. If Apple expect 2018 Mini users to connect to 4k screens and (crucially) want a decent experience with their machine then they could rule out the i5-8250U which would otherwise go into a refreshed Macbook Air.

And as Intel don't have a 15w CPU with Iris Graphics on offer at the moment I'd say that we're looking at a 28w solution for the Mini across the board .

 

[George Dawes]

I’ve ditched Mac OS and the mini after yet another hardware failure.

My 2011 model packed up after 4 years , now my 2014 model has given up the ghost , meanwhile my iPad which I bought in the interim is still going strong ... touch wood..

Wouldn’t mind but I’ve lost a lot of good stuff and even with traditional backups can’t access any of it now

You live and learn I guess

After buying an iPhone 8 Plus and loving the experience I’m getting an iPad Pro next

 

[malsan]

This popped up on an ad this morning. Got excited for a second, clicked through, and realized that it was not new as in new Mac mini that is almost certainly coming. It was new, as in new form of psychological torture. Still the 2014 model which for some reason is specced with 16GB RAM and a 500GB spinner. Timmy must love that parts warehouse clearing model. At least one product labeled as new in the ad will be available this week. My new Solus OS mini is almost certainly coming. Thanks, Tim.

 

[Boyd01]

That's crazy... B&H is selling the 1.4ghz/500gb HD mini with 16gb RAM for $800, never saw that before. It is special order however. Now I see they are also selling the base 4gb model for $400, which is a pretty good deal if you want an iTunes server (I paid $500 for the same thing a few years ago). But paying another $400 for an additional 12gb of RAM doesn't sound like a bargain to me.

 

[sublunar]

That's crazy... B&H is selling the 1.4ghz/500gb HD mini with 16gb RAM for $800, never saw that before. It is special order however. Now I see they are also selling the base 4gb model for $400, which is a pretty good deal if you want an iTunes server (I paid $500 for the same thing a few years ago). But paying another $400 for an additional 12gb of RAM doesn't sound like a bargain to me.

$799 seems to be the price on the US Apple Store for the 16Gb BTO. If the base 4Gb model was $399 then that's $100 under MSRP. The discounted base model just makes the 16Gb model look even worse value for money than it already is.

 

[Boyd01]

The discounted base model just makes the 16Gb model look even worse value for money than it already is.

My point exactly!

 

[sublunar]

The thing is, we see this sort of discounting more and more often these days. It's got to be a tacit admission that Apple are allowing third party retailers to sell cheaper.

As an aside, it's curious that I have read enough threads and heard second hand accounts of folks buying off the shelf Mac Minis only to find out of date versions of macOS installed on it. I've read about El Capitan (when 2 versions out of date), Sierra and now High Sierra 10.13.3 installed on stock models.

Assuming these aren't refurbished models being purchased it seems to suggest that Minis aren't uniformly popular (which makes sense). Obviously we know it's a combination of being woefully out of date, poor value for money, barely publicised in Apple Stores, and going out of fashion as a PC purchase as with the general trend in desktop computing.

We therefore take from that the fact that Apple are manufacturing Minis with versions of macOS from this year it tends to suggest that they are still paying for production runs while suppliers such as Intel continue to sell the parts required to assemble them.

 

[Yvan256]

Sorry, but it is ALL about margins for Apple. Pushing customers to more expensive options with higher margins.

Higher margins equals more expensive products equals less buyers equals shrinking marketshare equals dying platform.

 

[masterbaron]

... at some point I would expect a radical shift in the design, architecture and even the premise of a computer. The computer is no longer the primary "disrupter" ... the way we use computers is disruptive and the interface needs to step up. The focus needs a target and that target is the keyboard. Once the physical impediment of the keyboard is eliminated we'll be able to extract greater advances in the way we interface.

One day this thread will be arcane and the angst of desktop vs laptop or even hardware will seem primitive.

In reality though, in the back of my mind I suspect the keyboard will always remain as the last holdout to humanity - our last hope at slowing things down, keeping control as our fingers dance across the board giving pace to the ether.

 

[DesertSurfer]

Macrumors keeps showing this photo. Maybe it's the new Mac Mini, to be dual external CPU powered - just connect your iPhone and iPad.