Will 2016 Mini be quad core only?

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by dogslobber, May 11, 2016.

  1. Brad9893 macrumors 6502

    Brad9893

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2010
    Location:
    Hiding Under the Genius Bar
    #26
    If anyone was inclined to, they could post a gigantic list of links to webpages where people talk about their issues with Windows 10 based PC's. There is no such thing as an OS or a platform that has NO problems whatsoever, a platform that is reliable 100% of the time for everyone. Mac OS X has had issues from it's inception (this certainly isn't a new phenomenon), and so has Windows. So has iOS and Android.

    There is clearly a driver issue with these 2015 MBP's, and I'm sure that Apple will fix it as soon as they can (probably with 10.11.5).

    Personally, I find my Macs to be as reliable as they ever were. I have no issues.
     
  2. jpietrzak8, May 13, 2016
    Last edited: May 13, 2016

    jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #27
    NEWS FLASH: First adopters of a new OS update find bugs! This amazing incident has never been seen before in the history of computing!

    Come on, man. This happens frequently with new software releases. I personally prefer to avoid updating my machines to the latest bleeding-edge OS versions (whether from Apple or anybody else) for precisely this reason.

    It doesn't detract from my personal experience with the OS.

    Code:
    $ uptime
    8:06  up 21 days, 14:56, 2 users, load averages: 1.95 1.86 1.65
    

    EDIT: Oh, and btw, here's my 2007 box running OS X 10.6.8:

    Code:
    $ uptime
    8:11  up 243 days, 18:18, 2 users, load averages: 0.01 0.04 0.01
    
     
  3. AFEPPL macrumors 68030

    AFEPPL

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2014
    Location:
    England
    #28
    I'm coming,
    Still doesn't change the fact OS X is full of bloat and the quality has declined heavily over the last few years.
    As you show, an old version without problems.
     
  4. theluggage macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    #29
    As others have said, what you describe is called the "Apple TV" and it would probably run something more like iOS or TVOS than OS X.

    If Apple want to try the ARM on OS X experiment, I'd suggest a convertible (along the MS SurfaceBook lines) with an ARM in the tablet portion and an Intel in the base. When its docked, it could run iOS and OS X apps side-by-side, when undocked its just iOS with anything running on Intel "hibernated" in the base. That's really just a reaction to the current popularity of convertibles coupled with the fact that Apple (unlike MS) has a huge catalog of tablet-specific ARM software.

    If they wanted to go all-in on OSX for ARM they'd need to go for broke and switch everything but the 15" rMBP, the Mac Pro and the 5k iMac to ARM (& with the stated aim of switching those when workstation-class ARM chips were available). Otherwise you're asking developers to produce ARM versions of their software to support just one model... and while, yeah, for modern software written in XCode and using official frameworks that should be "just" a case of re-compiling, you don't do that without extensive regression testing at non-trivial cost.

    I'm not suggestinh any of those ideas as likelihoods - just possibilities. The only real point of an ARM Mac at the moment is that it would cut Apple free from Intel and let the roll their own CPU/GPU combinations. I'm guessing a "pro" ARM would have lots of cores and make heavy use of OpenCL to offload work onto the GPU.

    What would be nice for the future of the Mini is something like this, but in Mac form: http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/nuc/change-the-game-with-nuc.html - but I'm not holding my breath. However, to be fair, I think that chipset has only recently become available (it might end up in MacBook Pros, too), so who knows...
     
  5. jpietrzak8, May 13, 2016
    Last edited: May 13, 2016

    jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #30
    I will admit that yes, modern OS X has taken on quite a bit of additional bloat. :) Still, I'm having no trouble running it; my 2010 Mini is indeed running 10.11.4 El Capitan. It only gets rebooted when I screw it up, or when the power goes out. (Or when my cats get too playful with the cords...)
     
  6. dogslobber thread starter macrumors 68040

    dogslobber

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Location:
    Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
    #31
    I hate to say it, but right now Win 10 looks like an OS X killer. El Cap is a pig's ear compared to Win 10 on the same hardware. Apple should be aggressively making 10.12 the El Capitan Snow Leopard release.
     
  7. essiw macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2015
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #32
    I just hope there will be a 2016 mac mini, and that there will be at least quad core on it... :|
     
  8. Crosscreek macrumors 68030

    Crosscreek

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Location:
    Margarittaville
    #33
    Apple usually uses the chips in the low end MacBook Pro. I think it will be highly unlikely that will change. They are more interested in iMacs and Laptop sales which have higher demand and profits.

    BUT you never can tell with Apple.
     
  9. Santabean2000 macrumors 68000

    Santabean2000

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    #34
    They'd be stupid not to be exploring these options. Personally, I wouldn't mind switching to ARM; the heaviest app I use is FCP X and that could be optimised by  pretty quickly. [I fully understand why others would not be so keen tho...]
     
  10. Mr. Retrofire macrumors 603

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #35
    Which problem does this solve?
     
  11. dogslobber thread starter macrumors 68040

    dogslobber

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Location:
    Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
    #36
    It maximizes AAPL profit by reducing costs and burdens to middle men. If you invest in a chip technology that is demonstrabley equivalent to the middle men then why would you continue to leave money on the table? Doing so is failing AAPL shareholders.

    There's the business reason.
    --- Post Merged, May 14, 2016 ---
    Here's the technical reason:

    http://barefeats.com/macbook2016b.html
     
  12. Count Blah macrumors 68040

    Count Blah

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    US of A
    #37
    Apple would rather push people to the iMAC, Portable Mac, or Mac Pro, than produce a quality Mac Mini at this point.
     
  13. sublunar macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    #38
    My take on this is a Mac Nano, using M.2 flash and getting rid of the 2.5" spinning disk in favour of either USB connected storage or NAS, or cloud. It might also be the right device to have a remote control and AppleTV theatre mode and ability to natively run iOS AppleTV apps making it the de facto AppleTV 5.

    If they do this, however, I think it's a perfect opportunity to make it Mac App store only for software which will obviously also have to be compiled specifically for the platform. If they can bring such a device in at half the price of the current Mini it might be a hint at a future direction for the Mac.

    It might also mean a move upmarket for the existing Intel Mini...
     
  14. Mr. Retrofire macrumors 603

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #39
    <<<ouch<! And this in a customer-oriented forum!
     
  15. ThisBougieLife macrumors 68000

    ThisBougieLife

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, California
    #40
    I want to see Quad-core and dGPU like it used to have. But usually when Apple "dumbs something down", it doesn't recover from that. I'm not expecting anything great. I'm partly expecting the Mac Mini to be discontinued.
     
  16. Micky Do macrumors 68000

    Micky Do

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2012
    Location:
    An island in the Andaman Sea.
    #41
    Unlikely and unlikely.

    Some have been dreaming of some kind of Mac Super Mini, and some have been expecting the Mac Mini to be discontinued for years; dunno why.

    The Mac Mini is what it is, and likely to remain in the line up for a good while.
     
  17. ssmed macrumors 6502

    ssmed

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #42
    Using 10.11.4 is hardly bleeding edge on a 2015 Macbook Pro that was bought in early 2016. It's meant to be the bug fix software for the OX 10.11.2 that came on the computer and although this machine can run 10.10.x Apple do not support such downgrades. For business at least, Apple should offer OS choice when purchasing. Our latest MBP has a hard crash 3 times a week.
     
  18. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #43
    Beyond the present offering of Minis being castrated Macs, the supposed or at least presented goal was to be a pathway for Windows users to the Mac world. Why would Apple bother with using a non-Intel CPU that would cause more problems?

    ARM belongs in items like the ATV and when enough apps are available then maybe a Mini version.

    Candidly I would love a quad Mini (again). Until such time, I have not bothered to get a new/another Mini that is less powerful than the Quad Server 2.0 from years back. Now I get to enjoy considering Asrock and a few other iTX and mATX offerings which I can use for HTPC, traditional computer, NAS and then some. Apple should get out of the computer biz and stick to the iPhones and iPads along with watches and other "stuff" since they basically screwed the consumer on ability to upgrade their Macs, castrating the Mini and going inside out proprietary with the new Mac (mini) Pro.
     
  19. loby macrumors 6502a

    loby

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2010
    #44
    True...Microsoft has put great efforts into Windows 10 and it seems to be paying off for them, though they are forcing it on users... Yes, they may get some of the OS X users to jump ship, but many Apple fans have already spent too much money in Apple's ecosystem and have to stay.

    Apple should be focusing on OS X, but they make their money on toys now, especially the iphone.
     
  20. Miat macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2012
    #45
    Good. I am all for stiff competition in the market place and have no problem with Apple being given frequent kicks up the rear.

    Something similar is also currently happening with competition for the Mini type machines.

    Cannot up vote this enough.

    I have almost always stuck with the previous generation of both the OS (still on Mavericks) and hardware (main machine is a refurb 2012 Mini). They have been well tested in the market place, and refurb hardware is very good value. I have never regretted doing so.

    Not for everybody, of course, but you rarely go far wrong doing so.

    Did buy a 2012 Air (USB 3 version) when they were first released, but it was only a modest update to specs, not a brand new product as such.
     
  21. Crosscreek macrumors 68030

    Crosscreek

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Location:
    Margarittaville
    #46
    The Mac Mini use to be the jumping point from Windows to OS X. Now it's the opposite and not because of OS X but because of hardware vs value.

    Mini PC's are a mature market now and Apple was the founder. Like every thing that Apple use to be great at is now mediocre at best with old hardware, soldered and glued systems and bloated OS's.
     
  22. jpietrzak8, May 15, 2016
    Last edited: May 15, 2016

    jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #47
    ??? 10.11.4 is the very latest version of the OS. You can't get more bleeding edge unless you participate in the beta testing program -- 10.11.5 hasn't been released yet.

    You may want to believe that, but I'm not sure about Apple's numbering scheme any more. Features seem to get modified, added, or removed pretty much as needed these days; the "bigger" number changes seem mostly associated with large GUI modifications more than anything else. In any case, you're right, best to keep business-critical machines a few steps back from the latest version of the OS.

    Sadly, this is true. Still, they can't stop you from performing such downgrades yourself, if you're desperate enough.

    But in any case (to return to the topic of this particular forum), I haven't yet seen such problems on the Mac Mini. :)
    --- Post Merged, May 15, 2016 ---
    Yup, while the Mac Mini was created to play in the Small-Form-Factor PC niche, it was most definitely marketed as a pathway for Windows users to switch to a Mac. But at that time, all Macs were running on PowerPC processors, not Intel chips. Apple isn't necessarily tied to a single hardware architecture.
     
  23. MysticCow macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    #48
    God I hope not. There are issues with El Cap, but running to ARM is not going to solve any of them.
     
  24. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #49
    I don't follow your comment here. Mini have gone the exact same course as other Macs when going to Intel. Thus, Mini shared the same change of CPU. ALL of the Macs were Intel and continued. Taking one and moving it into a new venue with zero support (apps etc.) makes as I have suggest zero sense. Apple continues to market the Mini as that Windows to Mac device. So I will politely not find agreement with your statement.
     
  25. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #50
    Oh, I agree completely. If Apple chooses to move the Mini to their new in-house CPU, I would assume that they'll move the iMac and the laptops to it as well. Perhaps even the Pro, if they can manage to get enough cores working together well enough in a single machine.

    And they won't make the change in a single day, either. The previous two times they've shifted architectures, they've signaled the change many months in advance, and provided dev tools to create "universal" binaries, able to run on both architectures. So there is really no problem with app support.
     

Share This Page