Why new mini not USB-C powered

[benjai]

Is there any reason why they didn't make the new mini powered by USB? Connecting/charging a MacBook via a single cable into a USB-C monitor is already a great clutter free solution. If the mini had this, you could stick it behind/under the monitor and connected via a single cable.

If PD can supply enough power to a MacBook and all its accessories then surely could be done for mini too?

 

[papa8706]

MacBooks have internal batteries that are being charged at no more than 140 watts.

You wouldn’t have enough power to run the Mac Mini especially with any accessories. Also, without internal batteries, any power fluctuations would cause major issues.

One power cable isn’t a big deal since you’re already going to have to plug in the monitor anyway.

 

[rjbritt071]

At the end of the day, a USB-C cable has to plug into some sort of power supply which then plugs into the wall socket. The power supply of a Mac mini is all internal to the device, so there is no need for a USB-C solution. From what I'm seeing reported by Apple (https://support.apple.com/en-us/103253) the max rated power draw from the outlet was 100W (M2 pro) before this week, and the largest ever for a Mac mini was 122W. (see footnote, but "CPU Max" is power draw under a CPU heavy load). I do think it'd be neat if a usb-c cable could also power the Mac mini. But it should never be the only way, imo.

 

[russell_314]

Because this would mean an external power brick. Unlike many budget mini PCs, the Mac mini doesn’t require this. They could’ve probably made it smaller with an external power brick.

The second question is, would there be enough power for the Pro model? I suspect the regular mini would be fine, but I’m not sure about the Pro.

 

[vbctv]

Because Mac mini has an internal power supply which needs more power than what USB-C can produce and also USB-C is not meant to be used like that as an always plugged in power source. Even if they went to an external power brick it would still wouldn't be USB-C. Mac mini is meant to stay plugged in because it's a desktop.

 

[benjai]

Perhaps I've been misunderstood. The main advantage would be to power the mini directly off a monitor to save having an extra power cable. My Dell USB-C monitor can already power my MacBook (including its screen) and accessories. Are we saying that the Mac mini uses even more power than a MacBook?

 

[profets]

I was thinking about this as well, more of a way to make the mini portable and powering it when on the go (of course need to have a way to feed it 150W).

Perhaps I've been misunderstood. The main advantage would be to power the mini directly off a monitor to save having an extra power cable. My Dell USB-C monitor can already power my MacBook (including its screen) and accessories. Are we saying that the Mac mini uses even more power than a MacBook?

This would honestly be very nice. And the mini could have gotten even smaller without the power supply being internal.

 

[Macalway]

USB-c chargers are for batteries and very low power devices.
No battery as It's not portable. It's not portable in the traditional sense, as it's a component.

 

[AndyMacAndMic]

Perhaps I've been misunderstood. The main advantage would be to power the mini directly off a monitor to save having an extra power cable. My Dell USB-C monitor can already power my MacBook (including its screen) and accessories. Are we saying that the Mac mini uses even more power than a MacBook?

IMO you are not misunderstood, but you misunderstand. Your MacBook has a battery and an external power supply. In contrast a Mac mini has a built-in power supply. In the case of your MacBook the USB-C cable is connected to the external power supply and provides DC to the device. Also a monitor's USB output does only deliver DC and not AC. Your MacBook only accepts DC.

A Mac Mini is directly connected to the mains outlet (AC) and can not be powered (for instance from your monitor) by DC. A USB-C plug/cable is not a 110/230V AC power plug/cable (dont try this at home folks!).

 

[ignatius345]

I was thinking about this as well, more of a way to make the mini portable and powering it when on the go (of course need to have a way to feed it 150W).

This would honestly be very nice. And the mini could have gotten even smaller without the power supply being internal.

You'll be pleased to know Apple is one step ahead of you and actually sells two separate lines of portable computers!

 

[profets]

You'll be pleased to know Apple is one step ahead of you and actually sells two separate lines of portable computers!

LOL I'll take it one step further. My thought was having a Mac mini that I could use with my iPad Pro while on the road. I've really only used desktop Macs at home/work and iPads when out and about.

 

[vbctv]

Perhaps I've been misunderstood. The main advantage would be to power the mini directly off a monitor to save having an extra power cable. My Dell USB-C monitor can already power my MacBook (including its screen) and accessories. Are we saying that the Mac mini uses even more power than a MacBook?

You weren't misunderstood. It just doesn't work that way. Big difference between battery powered vs power supply. A PSU (Power Supply unit) requires more dedicated power than what Usb-C could power. In laymen's terms you would blow your monitor trying to power a Mac mini. Batteries like in MacBooks require less power and also charge over time, they don't require constant power, therefore a USB-C cable can charge them...

 

[Cloudsurfer]

I'm not sure what the peak power draw of the Mini is. The specs say 155W continuous, but short burst peaks could be well above that. Not sure if any PD monitor can handle those loads even for a short time. The internal 230V power supply absolutely can. I get the appeal for a USB powered Mini, but it would compromise its performance too much.

 

[picpicmac]

The main advantage would be to power the mini directly off a monitor to save having an extra power cable.

The requirement for a desktop Mac is that it be able to power other things.

So one should be able to power other things, such as drives, and charge devices, from the Mini.

The built in power supply of the Mini is thus a power supply for other, smaller things.

 

[Arctic Moose]

None of these arguments make any sense.

USB-C PD 3.1 can deliver up to 240W. Granted, there aren't many, if any, chargers available. However, cables are readily available, and at the very least there are PD controllers, so it would not be an issue for Apple to implement.

USB-C Power Delivery Controllers - Infineon Technologies

Most complete portfolio of USB-C Power Delivery (PD) solutions » more robust end-to-end Power Delivery and charging solutions. AEC-Q100 controllers available.

www.infineon.com

This would be more than enough to handle the peakiest of peak loads for the mini.

Mac mini - Technical Specifications

See all the technical specifications for Mac mini with the M4 or M4 Pro chip.

www.apple.com

From the Apple spec page:

• Line voltage: 100–240V AC
• Frequency: 50Hz to 60Hz, single phase
• Maximum continuous power: 155W

Apple already does this, just not using the USB-C connector. The iMac, which powers all sorts of things connected to it and also includes a screen, is powered by a 143W external power adapter.

iMac - iMac Technical Specifications

See all the technical specifications for iMac with the M4 chip and 24-inch display.

www.apple.com

Framework sells a 180W USB-C PD power adapter that would be more than sufficient for the Mac mini.

Framework

frame.work

Hell, my M3 Max MBP, Studio Display, Caldigit hub, scanner, microphone, external hard drive, network switch, amp, other random peripherals and things connected to chargers are currently collectively drawing less than 135W.

Elsewhere in my house I have been able to get rid of lots of cables and power adapters since I can run a Raspberry Pi, several home hubs and charging of power banks, phones, iPads, headphones and flashlights from a single beefier power supply with six ports.

Having an external power supply would mean an even smaller Mac mini, rackloads of minis could all be powered from a single larger power supply, powering the Mac mini from other DC sources such as 12V or 24V in cars or boats would be much simpler, one of the most failure-prone parts could be easily replaced and the mini could be sold without the brick and cable for less e-waste and reduced footprint for manufacturing and transport.

The only potential drawback I can possibly see would be the wall wart. If you really, really don't like it, there are lots of ways to hide it for pretty much any realistic scenario.

 

[AndyMacAndMic]

None of these arguments make any sense.

USB-C 3.1 can deliver up to 240W. Granted, there aren't many, if any, chargers available. However, cables are readily available, and at the very least there are PD controllers, so it would not be an issue for Apple to implement.

USB-C Power Delivery Controllers - Infineon Technologies

Most complete portfolio of USB-C Power Delivery (PD) solutions » more robust end-to-end Power Delivery and charging solutions. AEC-Q100 controllers available.

www.infineon.com

This would be more than enough to handle the peakiest of peak loads for the mini.

Mac mini - Technical Specifications

See all the technical specifications for Mac mini with the M4 or M4 Pro chip.

www.apple.com

From the Apple spec page:

• Line voltage: 100–240V AC
• Frequency: 50Hz to 60Hz, single phase
• Maximum continuous power: 155W

Apple already does this, just not using the USB-C connector. The iMac, which powers all sorts of things connected to it and also includes a screen, is powered by a 143W external power adapter.

iMac - iMac Technical Specifications

See all the technical specifications for iMac with the M4 chip and 24-inch display.

www.apple.com

Hell, my M3 Max MBP, Studio Display, Caldigit hub, scanner, microphone, external hard drive, network switch, amp, other random peripherals and things connected to chargers are currently collectively drawing less than 135W.

Having an external power supply would mean an even smaller Mac mini, rackloads of minis could all be powered from a single larger power supply, one of the most failure-prone parts could be easily replaced and the mini could be sold without the brick and cable for less e-waste and reduced footprint for manufacturing and transport.

The only potential drawback I can possibly see would be the wall wart. If you really, really don't like it, there are lots of ways to hide it for pretty much any realistic scenario.

These arguments make sense based on the current implementation of the new Mac Mini which has a built in power supply.

What you are proposing is basically a whole new Mac Mini with an external power supply. I agree in that case that would be a different story and your arguments would have merit.

But based on the title of this thread 'why is the new mini not usb- c powered?' the arguments provided make a whole lot of sense.

 

[Arctic Moose]

These arguments make sense based on the current implementation of the new Mac Mini which has a built in power supply.

What you are proposing is basically a whole new Mac Mini with an external power supply. I agree in that case that would be a different story and your arguments would have merit.

But based on the title of this thread 'why is the new mini not usb- c powered?' the arguments provided make a whole lot of sense.

You're breaking my brain.

The question is why the new Mac mini was designed in one way, and not in a different possible way, i.e. with an external power supply.

I'm sure Apple has their reasons for choosing the implementation they did, but I would have preferred the alternative.

🤷‍♂️

 

[AndyMacAndMic]

...

The question is why the new Mac mini was designed in one way, and not in a different possible way, i.e. with an external power supply.

...

That is your interpretation, but not literally asked. That is probably why a lot of reactions in this thread differ from your opinion. But, as said, if Apple would make a Mac Mini with an external PSU (don't hold your breath) you would be completely right 😉

 

[Arctic Moose]

That is your interpretation, but not literally asked. That is probably why a lot of reactions in this thread differ from your opinion. But, as said, if Apple would make a Mac Mini with an external PSU (don't hold your breath) you would be completely right 😉

Let me qoute the literally asked question for you.

Is there any reason why they didn't make the new mini powered by USB?

How can you interpret this as anything other than "why did Apple choose this over that for this new computer that was just released?" I have listed one feeble reason why they could have made the choice they did, and quite a few compelling ones arguing for the alternative, which Apple did not choose, but that invalidate most of the arguments presented in this thread.

The reality could be something along the lines of Tim Cook buying a huge lot of power supplies, and refusing to change the design until they have all been used in a product, that the design they went with is expected to make more money over the product lifetime or something else equally depressing.

 

[benjai]

Yes I can confirm my question really meant, "why didn't they make the new mini powered by USB". As in why didn't they design the mini to support it. Sorry, I thought that was clear.

I thought I was missing something like maybe USB-C couldn't supply enough power but if it can power a laptop and screen then surely it could power a mini.

Anyhow, it seems just to be a difference in opinion. The new mini is already small enough but I think it would be a useful feature to save on having a power cable.

 

[icymountain]

Perhaps I've been misunderstood. The main advantage would be to power the mini directly off a monitor to save having an extra power cable. My Dell USB-C monitor can already power my MacBook (including its screen) and accessories. Are we saying that the Mac mini uses even more power than a MacBook?

I think a lot of problems could come from accessories. This has always been a problem with laptops too. I cannot count how many times I was stuck with non working external hard drives in the old days of USB-A and various power issues, possibly happening in the middle of file copies. USB-C has not completely fixed that, if at all. So you would certainly get a working Mac Mini but many would hook a few accessories (a few external hard drives, charging keyboard and mice, etc) and running into problems, which would not be acceptable on a desktop.

 

[azentropy]

I think eventually we will could see a usb-c powered Mac (that isn't a MacBook). Even if they go the route of putting a smallish battery in.. As I mentioned in other threads even though the new mini design is cool, I'd would have liked Apple to maybe keep the old mini design and come out with say a Mac "nano" that would work this way that would be designed primarily to be powered by monitors. This combined with Apple extending the Apple Studio Display line (24", 27", 32" etc.) and a cool mounting mechanism could eliminate those clamoring for a bigger non-pro iMac because they like the all in one "clean" styling.

 

[MacCheetah3]

USB-PD spec aside, let’s address the original inquiry and intent: powering a Mac mini from a monitor/display.

As noted, Apple states the M4 Mac mini models can pull up to 155W of continuous power. Are there any monitors that support that much? Apple’s Studio and even Pro XDR display support up to "96W host charging.” Quick searches of Dell and MSI models reveal up to 90W of PD.

For a MacBook or other portable, this limitation isn’t typically a problem. If the external power source can’t supply enough, the computer can rely on the (internal) battery.

To quickly address the other intent, portability…. Well.. It’s not really sensible/practical. MacBooks are the portable Mac mini, integrating the other necessary components.

 

[hipnetic]

Reviving a fairly old thread here, but…

I’m in agreement with the OP. Imagine a Mac mini with no internal power supply (powered only by USB-C) and is even smaller/thinner/lighter, that could connect to an iPad Pro w/Magic Keyboard, travel with you easily, and allow you to harness the full power of macOS as an occasional alternative to iPadOS.

 

[russell_314]

Reviving a fairly old thread here, but…

I’m in agreement with the OP. Imagine a Mac mini with no internal power supply (powered only by USB-C) and is even smaller/thinner/lighter, that could connect to an iPad Pro w/Magic Keyboard, travel with you easily, and allow you to harness the full power of macOS as an occasional alternative to iPadOS.

You would still need to carry around a power supply. Right now you have the same thing except the power supply is built into the Mac mini.

Is there an advantage to having the power supply separate?

I kind of understand the cool factor of getting to a hotel room, pulling out a Anker 120 watt USB-C power supply, connecting it to all your electronic devices to include the mini then connecting some big portable screen. I just don’t see that having a very broad audience, except the extreme nerds. Most people that are traveling are going to carry a MacBook. With or without the power supply being built in, I don’t think the mini is going to appeal to most travelers. The main reason is people aren’t going to want to bring a separate screen or have to view it on the hotel TV.

If you’re talking about a scenario at home then most people aren’t going to want a separate power supply. Ask anyone about monitors and the one thing they hate is the stupid external power supply that some have. Even if it’s a USB-C power supply, most people aren’t going to like it at least I don’t think so.