The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming

[jasnw]

Me either. From Apple's perspective the Mini's main KPI is that it doesn't cut into sales of their other Macs.

If Apple really does make plans for it's near-deathbed headless desktop line based on specious concerns about possible fratricide on the AIO line, then it is indeed game over. Since Apple won't tell anyone what it really considers important we continue to be faced with making our own future plans based on hoping Apple doesn't act as stupid as we are afraid it will. And I hate to disappoint those who prowl this thread awaiting the whining (whinging, for you Rule Britannica folks) should Apple fail to produce a useful Mini, but I think a lot of people who post here will simply bail for something not-Apple and get on with their lives. It has become a sort of canary-in-the-cave product - if Apple shows they don't care about the non-AIO desktop user by punting yet again on the Mini, that's the indication that the CO levels are too high for advanced life forms.

 

[PickUrPoison]

My negative sentiment toward Apple's treatment of the mini is precisely the reason I agree with this statement. Apple could and should release a hex-core Mac mini, I just don't believe they will when the last five years have shown they hardly care at all about the mini.

I never mentioned a dedicated GPU as a possibility. External GPU yes, but obviously as an extra expense.

eGPUs are expensive, and Apple would never assume mini buyers would purchase them.

The 45W CPUs have poor iGPU performance, and would need to be paired with an onboard dGPU to be an appropriate choice for use in a mini.

So the 28W CPUs are a better fit for the mini. Of course they’ll have quad core and 32GB max DDR4. Low-end minis will be 15W/dual core, maybe only configurable for a max of 16GB DDR4.

 

[redheeler]

The 45W CPUs have poor iGPU performance, and would need to be paired with an onboard dGPU to be an appropriate choice for use in a mini.

You do have a point there about the integrated graphics. The high-end 2011 Mac mini did have a dedicated GPU, so that possibility shouldn't be dismissed completely even at the $1099 price point.

Also consider that the base model 4K iMac has a dedicated GPU and 4K display for just $200 more than the theoretical $1,099 mini. Hopefully the next refresh will also see Fusion drive become standard, as that's badly needed for the Mac mini and 4K iMac.

 

[ElectronGuru]

Arguing over when it will happen has been replaced with arguing over what will happen

Music to my ears...

 

[PickUrPoison]

You do have a point there about the integrated graphics. The high-end 2011 Mac mini did have a dedicated GPU, so that possibility shouldn't be dismissed completely even at the $1099 price point.

Also consider that the base model 4K iMac has a dedicated GPU and 4K display for just $200 more than the theoretical $1,099 mini. Hopefully the next refresh will also see Fusion drive become standard, as that's badly needed for the Mac mini and 4K iMac.

Well sure it could be done but it still seems to me that leveraging the 13” MBP/entry level 21.5” 2K iMac is the most logical course of action.

Apple actually telegraphed this path when they released the 2017 21.5” 2K iMac over a year ago. Out of nowhere they redesigned the motherboard to take socketed DDR4 (upgradeable to 32GB) instead of just re-using the LPDDR3 it inherited from the MBP, which it had always done previously in 2014/2015/2016.

As far as I know, no one in this thread ever realized the switch to DDR4 and the 32GB max in that $1,099 iMac.

That iMac is the new mini, just with a display. It’ll have all the same ports as that iMac, and Apple will drop in all the same processors that the 13” MBP has today.

That’s my prediction anyway lol

 

[redheeler]

Well sure it could be done but it still seems to me that leveraging the 13” MBP/entry level 21.5” 2K iMac is the most logical course of action.

The primary reason that $1,099 iMac exists is for education or business customers. Apple selling a cheaper cut-down iMac for schools to buy in bulk is nothing new.

Yes it's available to the general public as well, though for regular customers who want an all-in-one system and not a mini, it's definitely worthwhile to spend the $200 and get the 4K instead.

Apple actually telegraphed this path when they released the 2017 21.5” 2K iMac over a year ago. Out of nowhere they redesigned the motherboard to take socketed DDR4 (upgradeable to 32GB) instead of just re-using the LPDDR3 it inherited from the MBP, which it had always done previously in 2014/2015/2016.

As far as I know, no one in this thread ever realized the switch to DDR4 and the 32GB max in that $1,099 iMac.

Upgrading the RAM yourself in the $1,099 iMac is not easy, not supported by Apple, and possibly voids the warranty. This is unlikely to change with the 2018 models.

 

[PickUrPoison]

The primary reason that $1,099 iMac exists is for education or business customers. Apple selling a cheaper cut-down iMac for schools to buy in bulk is nothing new.

Yes it's available to the general public as well, though for regular customers who want an all-in-one system and not a mini, it's definitely worthwhile to spend the $200 and get the 4K instead.

Upgrading the RAM yourself in the $1,099 iMac is not easy, not supported by Apple, and possibly voids the warranty. This is unlikely to change with the 2018 models.

The advisability of buying an iMac 2K and whether or not the RAM is upgradeable is hardly the point of my post lol.

1) Why do you think Apple redesigned the iMac 2K motherboard to use DDR4 (and 32GB of it) instead of leaving it alone to use the same LPDDR3 it always had?

2) Who the heck would ever put 32GB of RAM in the iMac 2K?

 

[redheeler]

1) Why do you think Apple redesigned the iMac 2K motherboard to use DDR4 (and 32GB) instead of leaving it alone to use the same LPDDR3 it always had?

The change to RAM slots applied to all the 21.5" iMacs released in 2017, not just the $1,099 model. Not sure exactly why the change was made (maybe easier from a technician or manufacturing perspective), but it does provide some hope for a Mac mini with upgradable RAM.

 

[PickUrPoison]

The change to RAM slots applied to all the 21.5" iMacs released in 2017, not just the $1,099 model. Not sure exactly why the change was made (maybe easier from a technician or manufacturing perspective), but it does provide some hope for a Mac mini with upgradable RAM.

Yes the change was made to all the 21.5 but that just makes it more curious and strange to have been done to the 2K at all.

Only the 2K model uses the motherboard from the 13” MBP, it uses a mobile CPU with the BGA1356 package. All the other 21.5 models use desktop chips with the 1151 socket, and have respectable processors like the 3.6/4.2GHz i7-7700 that can actually make use of 32GB—which btw makes it a rather profitable $2300 config. Easy to see why Apple would want to make 32GB a CTO.

Apple didn’t have to bother with the 2K, no one needs 32GB on that 15W CPU machine and it’s motherboard is a one-off in the iMac lineup. Why go to all the trouble of re-engineering a motherboard used by only one model, to use memory it doesn’t need—and that Apple doesn’t even let you CTO (the max is a 16GB config)?

My answer is that it’s the new Mac mini as iMac; no way to know until it’s released

 

[Crosscreek]

I think you all may be getting ahead of the game here. If you look at the recent history of lower end Mac refresh, Apple uses left over processors from previous generation Macs so I would expect a new Mini refresh may only get Skylake 2 core mobile processors.

 

[and 4096 others like this]

I think you all may be getting ahead of the game here. If you look at the recent history of lower end Mac refresh, Apple uses left over processors from previous generation Macs so I would expect a new Mini refresh may only get Skylake 2 core mobile processors.

Naaah

I will go further, this is my prediction:

Three tears of Mac mini with additional configuration options

1. I think there is 0% chance for non-soldered RAM (Mac mini is cheapest Mac, so upgrade option would be too easy to make this computer better, without paying Apple)

2. Every Mac mini model will have 8 GB RAM with option to upgrade it to 16 GB (tear 1, 2 and 3) or 32 GB (tear 2 and 3)

3. Only integrated graphics HD 615 or 620 for base model (tear 1), Iris Plus 640 or 650 (tear 2 or/and tear 3) and Iris Plus 650 (tear 3 model)

4. CPU

- i5 7Y54 1,2 GHz (boost 3,2 GHz) or i5 7200U 2,5 GHz (boost 3,1 GHz) - tear 1
- i5 7267U 2,2 GHz (boost 3,4 GHz) or i5 7260U 3,1 GHz (boost 3,5 GHz) - tear 2
- i5 7287U 3,3 GHz (boost 3,7 GHz)

All have 2 cores, but I think tear 2 and 3 will have option to upgrade to i5/i7 4 cores.

5. Apple Fusion Drive 1 TB for tear 1, 2 TB Fusion Drive for tear 2 and 256 GB SSD for tear 3. All tears have upgrade options.

6. Because of Fusion Drive, there still will be option to update it alone, without paying Apple

 

[Crosscreek]

Naaah

I will go further, this is my prediction:

Three tears of Mac mini with additional configuration options

1. I think there is 0% chance for non-soldered RAM (Mac mini is cheapest Mac, so upgrade option would be too easy to make this computer better, without paying Apple)

2. Every Mac mini model will have 8 GB RAM with option to upgrade it to 16 GB (tear 1, 2 and 3) or 32 GB (tear 2 and 3)

3. Only integrated graphics HD 615 or 620 for base model (tear 1), Iris Plus 640 or 650 (tear 2 or/and tear 3) and Iris Plus 650 (tear 3 model)

4. CPU

- i5 7Y54 1,2 GHz (boost 3,2 GHz) or i5 7200U 2,5 GHz (boost 3,1 GHz) - tear 1
- i5 7267U 2,2 GHz (boost 3,4 GHz) or i5 7260U 3,1 GHz (boost 3,5 GHz) - tear 2
- i5 7287U 3,3 GHz (boost 3,7 GHz)

All have 2 cores, but I think tear 2 and 3 will have option to upgrade to i5/i7 4 cores.

5. Apple Fusion Drive 1 TB for tear 1, 2 TB Fusion Drive for tear 2 and 256 GB SSD for tear 3. All tears have upgrade options.

6. Because of Fusion Drive, there still will be option to update it alone, without paying Apple

Apple will offer very few options for the Mini. It's an entry level Mac bottom of the Apple barrel red headed step child. Lol

 

[arkitect]

Naaah

I will go further, this is my prediction:

Three tears of Mac mini with additional configuration options

Oh there will be tears all right… tears of frustration from we the patient and much tested Mac Mini fans…

 

[and 4096 others like this]

Oh there will be tears all right… tears of frustration from we the patient and much tested Mac Mini fans…

Well, till now I thought that you write word "tier" same as "tear"
Now I see how funny my previous post is

Not gonna edit it. Maybe every level of Mac mini will be truly a tear tier.

 

[AZhappyjack]

I must say that I am tempted to be moved by all of the optimism here of late... but let me temper that enthusiasm just a bit with reality. The last time Apple 'updated' the Mac mini, we lost ground. No quad core processors. No user upgradeability. It is, as @Crosscreek observed, the "entry level Mac, bottom of the Apple barrel, red headed step child". Apple has no desire to update this machine to anything powerful enough to threaten the iMac product line in the desktop space.

I firmly believe that if the Mac mini does, in fact, get a refresh, it will be cobbled together with bottom of the barrel, leftover parts and Apple will still demand a price tag that covers its huge profit margin. But at this point, we have no guarantee of any update. Cook says, rather cryptically, "we do plan for Mac mini to be an important part of our product line going forward"... and an Apple analyst now says that it's coming... but y'all are whipped up into a feeding frenzy over a product that might actually get updated, but it will most definitely disappoint as it falls extremely short of your overblown and unreasonable expectations.

It's up to Apple to prove me wrong.

 

[JagdTiger]

I fully expect it to be under-spec'ed compared to the rest of the Mac line... it will be overpriced, given the specs, and per the current state of Apple, it will be absolutely locked down in terms of upgrades... everything will be glued down or soldered in. Like I said, underwhelming.

Which is what all the independent computer companies did from Apple, Atari, Commodore, Texas Instruments, Sinclair, they all soldered and glued parts...only the IBM wintel boxes allowed upgrades.

 

[redheeler]

Yes the change was made to all the 21.5 but that just makes it more curious and strange to have been done to the 2K at all.

Only the 2K model uses the motherboard from the 13” MBP, it uses a mobile CPU with the BGA1356 package. All the other 21.5 models use desktop chips with the 1151 socket, and have respectable processors like the 3.6/4.2GHz i7-7700 that can actually make use of 32GB—which btw makes it a rather profitable $2300 config. Easy to see why Apple would want to make 32GB a CTO.

Apple didn’t have to bother with the 2K, no one needs 32GB on that 15W CPU machine and it’s motherboard is a one-off in the iMac lineup. Why go to all the trouble of re-engineering a motherboard used by only one model, to use memory it doesn’t need—and that Apple doesn’t even let you CTO (the max is a 16GB config)?

My answer is that it’s the new Mac mini as iMac; no way to know until it’s released

As I said, even though the change to slots was made, Apple doesn't want you upgrading the RAM yourself in the iMac 21.5". It's not considered user-serviceable, meaning the slots are only there for Apple's own technicians.

 

[JagdTiger]

I must say that I am tempted to be moved by all of the optimism here of late... but let me temper that enthusiasm just a bit with reality. The last time Apple 'updated' the Mac mini, we lost ground. No quad core processors. No user upgradeability. It is, as @Crosscreek observed, the "entry level Mac, bottom of the Apple barrel, red headed step child". Apple has no desire to update this machine to anything powerful enough to threaten the iMac product line in the desktop space.

I firmly believe that if the Mac mini does, in fact, get a refresh, it will be cobbled together with bottom of the barrel, leftover parts and Apple will still demand a price tag that covers its huge profit margin. But at this point, we have guarantee of any update. Cook says, rather cryptically, "we do plan for Mac mini to be an important part of our product line going forward"... and an Apple analyst now says that it's coming... but y'all are whipped up into a feeding frenzy over a product that might actually get updated, but it will most definitely disappoint as it falls extremely short of your overblown and unreasonable expectations.

It's up to Apple to prove me wrong.

Well then if Apple people don’t get a upgrade they like then there is only one scenario to do...Boycott!

 

[redheeler]

I must say that I am tempted to be moved by all of the optimism here of late... but let me temper that enthusiasm just a bit with reality. The last time Apple 'updated' the Mac mini, we lost ground. No quad core processors. No user upgradeability. It is, as @Crosscreek observed, the "entry level Mac, bottom of the Apple barrel, red headed step child". Apple has no desire to update this machine to anything powerful enough to threaten the iMac product line in the desktop space.

I firmly believe that if the Mac mini does, in fact, get a refresh, it will be cobbled together with bottom of the barrel, leftover parts and Apple will still demand a price tag that covers its huge profit margin. But at this point, we have guarantee of any update. Cook says, rather cryptically, "we do plan for Mac mini to be an important part of our product line going forward"... and an Apple analyst now says that it's coming... but y'all are whipped up into a feeding frenzy over a product that might actually get updated, but it will most definitely disappoint as it falls extremely short of your overblown and unreasonable expectations.

It's up to Apple to prove me wrong.

Very true. We have to remember that the last time Apple cared about offering a good Mac mini was six years ago.

Since then, Apple TV has become a lot more capable as Apple's solution for a HTPC, and MacOS Server is now a shadow of its former self. HTPC and server were both reasons to offer a good Mac mini in 2012, but not as much given Apple's focus in 2018.

 

[alien3dx]

As I said, even though the change to slots was made, Apple doesn't want you upgrading the RAM yourself in the iMac 21.5". It's not considered user-serviceable, meaning the slots are only there for Apple's own technicians.

i have ask my service provider if i can upgrade via proper channel
*** they said not available.
*** maybe after few years 4 or 5 maybe then i will upgrade to 16GB . To be truth 16 GB is crazy, in windows i rarely max up till 8 GB ram. Even swap file can be defaulted to non. Some people here would said , if memory don't use waste memory. But for developer for me , it just a memory leak and spoil brat developer.

 

[leo-tech]

To be truth 16 GB is crazy, in windows i rarely max up till 8 GB ram...

There is nothing crazy about 16gb memory. Computers can be used for many purposes, including running hypervisors and virtual machines for education or practical tasks or whatever, and that alone may change memory requirements dramatically.

 

[Cape Dave]

I predict a mini with 8 FULL cores! Booyah!

 

[alien3dx]

There is nothing crazy about 16gb memory. Computers can be used for many purposes, including running hypervisors and virtual machines for education or practical tasks or whatever, and that alone may change memory requirements dramatically.

what is you said nothing related to ram.. In old times, we just dual boot and no need to do hypvisor, docker,hyper-v . In my office last week , an intern scare to do a dual boot linux because used to vmware/vbox.

a virtual ram disk

 

[leo-tech]

In old times, we just dual boot and no need to do hypervisor...

The beauty of virtualization is that you no longer need dual-boot in order to run this OS or that OS - why not run both this OS and that OS alongside, simultaneously, make them work together in harmony, bring the best of both worlds to your fingertips?

 

[Tinmania]

Apple will offer very few options for the Mini. It's an entry level Mac bottom of the Apple barrel red headed step child. Lol

It's worse than that: It is the stepchild born in the "switcher" era, where gaining on Windows was an Apple goal, even with little chance of winning. Its primary reason for existing was to attract PC users with a simple, relatively inexpensive, box which could use an existing keyboard, mouse, and display. This was a more affordable alternative to the headless Power Mac/Mac Pro and iMac.

The mini turned out to be great as a HTPC, especially when the Front Row interface came out a year after the mini's release. But with the release of the Apple TV even that aspect of the mini was neutered. The Apple TV, essentially a hobby for Apple at that time, had more clout than the mini.

Back to today... While I really hope we see something good for the mini, I will be surprised if it gets much love. Still, my fingers are crossed (for the last time).



Mike