Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > News > Tech News > Editorial: In defense of the new $499 Mac mini

Editorial: In defense of the new $499 Mac mini
Thread Tools
NewsPoster
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2014, 01:59 PM
 
After its release, we came out pretty strongly against Apple's new $499 Mac mini. We thought it to be underpowered, and despite some minor improvements, generally a step backwards. Time has passed, tempers have cooled a bit, and we've given it a second thought. While we're not saying that its a must-buy, there are some good use cases for it, and in some instances it trumps the 2012 model.

Desktop

This one is obvious. This is, in essence, a MacBook Air with a hard drive rather than an SSD. Word processing, light gaming, desktop publishing, all of the things we take for granted in OS X are very doable with the 1.4GHz Mini, which can ratchet up when demand calls for it. Nobody complained about the Air with a relatively-modest i5 processor, so why are there complaints about it with the Mini?

Yes, it can transcode video and do number crunching -- just not that fast, so be a little patient! The low thermal design power on the Haswell keeps heat down, so that's not really a factor. The HD 5000 chipset isn't a slouch either, as long as you're not expecting high-end performance. The low amount of default RAM is an issue, but not the obstacle we thought it would be. In our brief time with the low-end Mini, we hammered out a document in Pages and served two 1080p streams through iTunes without problems.

Are you doing word processing or websurfing? What do you need 16GB of RAM, super-fast video, and a 1TB PCIe SSD for? For typical users, the low-end Mac mini is a budget-priced unit that will do the job. Power-users will want to look elsewhere, but we often forget that most users are focused more on Facebook and web browsing than video trans-coding or high-end games.

Set-Top Box

At first glance, the specs are underwhelming, we admit. The processor is a Haswell i5-4260U clocked at 1.4GHz, with a "Turbo Boost" of up to 2.7GHz. Standard, the $499 config comes with a 500GB, 5400RPM hard drive, and 4GB of LPDDR3 memory. Video is provided, as mentioned, by Intel's integrated HD Graphics 5000 chip.

Before we go any farther, there's some confusion to clear up regarding "4K" resolutions when it comes to the latest high-rez video. There are two standards for 4K -- 3840x2160 at 16:9, and 4096x2160 at 19:10. The television industry uses the former, also known as Ultra HD (UHD). Digital cinema uses the latter resolution. Nearly every 4K TV is UHD, with a few (expensive!) standouts using the latter option.

The HD Graphics 5000 chip can push UHD at 30Hz. The higher resolution is driven at 24Hz. There are lot of complaints about this low frequency, but the complaints are mostly meaningless. While most TVs are 60Hz, 30Hz broadcasts force the TV to scan a frame twice before advancing to the next frame. Movies are generally filmed at 24 frames per second, with a few notable exceptions, so this matches the higher resolution, without resorting to "pulldown," or adapting the video stream to match the frequency of the display.

So, this all said, even the low-end Mac mini supports 4K video just fine, at least from a statistical breakdown. What about actual video and audio playback performance? As far as stutter-free video goes, the Haswell i5-4260U is a known performer in video playback. Playback of encoded video isn't a problem at all. In fact, we played back a 4K video, and streamed the same two 1080p files to Apple TVs we used in our Pages test, all without a hitch.

The audio chip is a Cirrus Logic 4208-CRZ as seen on the Mac Pro and 2013 MacBook Air. Under OS X, this does not support HD audio streams, but this isn't a surprise. That said, the audio out is analog or optical, depending on cable. This optical cable can handle a 5.1 or 7.1 stream played back through Plex or VLC to an external surround sound decoder which, if you're serious about audio, you have anyway, right?

Obviously, 4K content is still rare, but will amp up over time. Getting it on the device in the first place is left as an exercise for the reader, but the Gigabit Ethernet port the low-end Mini sports is certainly a good start.

Steam Box

Don't get us started on hardcore gaming. To be clear, this won't do it, but as we said before, the HD 5000 graphics aren't terrible by any stretch. Moreover, a Sony PlayStation 4 controller syncs with OS X just fine, and titles on Valve's Steam service that have living room compatibility generally play pretty well.

Yes, Civilization V bogs down in the end-game, but does this shock anybody? We didn't do deep testing on gaming suitability with it in the limited time we had, but titles like Broforce, Wasteland 2, and the early-access Warmachine: Tactics all played well on a 1080p TV.

Home server

I confess, I've had a home server in one form or another for nearly 15 years, first on a Performa 6500 with a 20GB IDE drive. If you read MacNN or Electronista, generally speaking, you may well be the sort who can benefit from a central file repository behind your router's firewall. If you connect it to the Internet with something like OS X Server, that's up to you.

Four USB 3.0 ports. Two Thunderbolt 2 ports. That's a lot of capacity for external storage expansion, meaning you can toss all your movies on it. Power management was excellent in our testing with new drive cases. The machine sleeps after a period of inactivity, and appropriately wakes on network access, with external drives also sleeping as necessary.

Think iTunes, HomeKit. Consider the value of all of your photos stored locally, and not just in a photo stream on iCloud. Do Time Machine backups on it, with some minor hackery. Combine this functionality with set-top video playback, and one device can be the hub of your house's digital life.

The computer for the rest of... who?

Apple's Mac faithful need to get over the fact that they're not Apple's bread and butter, and haven't been for ages. The veterans of the Apple/IBM wars did their parts, and Apple said "thanks" by not, as famously suggested by Michael Dell, selling off the company's assets and closing shop. The new low-end Mac mini isn't really intended for enthusiasts, and that's clear. Interestingly, we feel that its intention is to capitalize off the halo effect from somebody whose first device is an iPhone or iPad, and want to see what the other side of the fence looks like, rather than the other way around like it was after the iPod touch release.

As far as Apple is concerned, full-size PCIe slots are dead, and never coming back. There will never be a Mac mini Pro. If you need expansion, you'd better be able to get it on Thunderbolt, or USB 3.0. Apple's got a plan for (nearly) everybody, and the lowest low-end of the PC market and hard-core high-end enthusiasts just aren't that important to the company, for better or for worse. Just because you may not like the new Mac mini, that doesn't make it a bad computer with absolutely no use, or bad for the company.
( Last edited by NewsPoster; Oct 24, 2014 at 06:39 PM. )
     
zehspoon1
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2014, 02:30 PM
 
It seems something motivated you to update your story. I wonder what it could have been?
     
prl99
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: pacific northwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2014, 02:42 PM
 
@zeh Probably all the complaints from spec-only type of people, both Apple lovers and haters. The author also answers you question in the last two paragraphs. As far as using it for a home server (documents, music, movies, TV shows), the CPU only has to be able to access disks and the network meaning it doesn't need a ton of computational power. Four USB3 and two Thunderbolt 2 ports along with gig-ethernet means it has enough power to do it and at a very low price. Even getting the base model means you could set up something similar to a NAS system accessing a ton of TB2 storage at a very low price. A server doesn't even need a display so the built-in graphics are fine.
     
Mike Wuerthele
Managing Editor
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2014, 02:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by zehspoon1 View Post
It seems something motivated you to update your story. I wonder what it could have been?
Time with the device (that was purchased by a friend of mine), and some perspective. Analysis day-of-announcement is problematic sometimes, and often lacks time and perspective.
     
DiabloConQueso
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2014, 03:03 PM
 
The biggest drawback of the new crop of minis is the removal of the ability to upgrade hard drive and RAM ("easily").

As I understand it, RAM is now soldered in so it couldn't be replaced anyway. Just like the MacBook Air.

The hard drive still seems to be upgradable, but is no longer "user-serviceable" and requires a tad more effort.

Unfortunately, RAM upgrades and hard drive upgrades are what have kept my 2009 C2D mini going for so long -- maxing out the RAM and swapping in an SSD breathed a ton of new life into this machine, allowing me to continue to work through OS X upgrades and updates and keep my business humming along.

I suspect that, like the article alludes to, the consumers who purchase lower-end computers largely do not upgrade their machines over time, and simply buy a new machine a few years down the road when appropriate. While there are fringe users like myself who used to prefer low-end machines with aftermarket upgrades, we're probably -- nay, definitely -- a minority in the larger scheme of the whole Apple userbase.

While this mini reflects a somewhat new direction for Apple with their machines (slightly lower and more attractive pricing, but at the cost of lower specs and upgradability), it's understandable that perhaps they're trying to really differentiate between the pro/sumer and consumer markets in certain ways -- making low-end, home-user machines non-upgradable while nudging the pro users into the more applicable pro machines (MacBook Pro, Mac Pro, etc.). It's definitely revenue-driven, as users like me will no longer give Apple a few hundred bucks and then hot-rod our machines after-the-fact with 3rd-party components, and will instead save a little longer and go for the higher-end iMac or Mac/MacBook Pro machines.

While it certainly will piss off a few die-hard, legacy Apple fans, it's a smart move from a business standpoint and those that whine will only whine for so long and then accept the fate of the mini, or leave the platform altogether -- either way, those specific users (like myself) represent insignificant portions of Apple's userbase, and you can't please everyone.
     
boomer0127
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 24, 2014, 10:38 PM
 
i am typing this on my brand new 2014 2.6GHz mini with 16 GB RAM and the Fusion drive. I bought it since our 2002 Powerbook G4 is starting to go wonky with video as it gets heated up and I am tired of my son stealing my 2007 17-inch MBP for minecraft. For about $1K I got a machine that should last my 8th grader though high school running M$ office and connecting to his school network. So far so good. It is really fast relative to my ancient computers (seems faster than my wife's 2009 15-inch MBP also). It sync'd my user account from the MBP overnight from the time machine and so far has been great. My son was able to max out the video settings in minecraft with no lag and I got incredibly sick watching him spin around at lightning speed. About this mac reported 1536 MB of RAM dedicated to video at the time. He is happy, I am happy that for about $1K (EDU discount) I was able to get this machine to go with our 1920x1200 samsung 23-inch monitor. When prices drop i will likely pull the spinner drive and go with another SSD in a couple of years. So far it is much faster than I expected. Applications launch in 2-3 seconds, iPhoto scrolls without pausing (24266 photos),

While I was disappointed to hear that its multicore performance was lower, if I was to create this machine BTO from the 2012 generation, I would have paid an extra $300-$400 to make the same specs. Yes it would have been quad-core but other than that the mini would have been the same. Yes I could have gotten the bare bones and done the upgrades myself with the older model but for me the time just isn't available so it would probably never happy anyway.

Overall, on day 2 (great song BTW) I am very happy with my new mini. It will do the job for my purposes for years to come.
     
elroth
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2014, 12:06 AM
 
boomer127, didn't the 2012 mini have a 7200 rpm hard drive, instead of the 5400 rpm one in the new mini?
     
hayesk
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2014, 12:52 PM
 
Very good article. As for the RAM concerns - simple - max out the RAM when you buy. That's my new policy for every Mac I buy. The couple hundred bucks may seem like a lot when you buy, but average that out for the several years you'll own the Mac, and it's peanuts. You also get increased performance from the start. And it's less time the OS has to hit that 5400RPM drive.
     
boomer0127
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2014, 01:50 PM
 
@elroth - I factored in the cost of a Fusion drive. But yes the stock drive was 7200 RPM.

@hayesk - you are absolutely right. You might save a little money waiting to upgrade eventually, but my wife basically told me that if i didn't do it at purchase that I would never do it until we spent some time suffering down the road. why suffer until you have to? I placed and cancelled 3 orders with various permutations of processor, RAM and HD until the wife insisted I just get the best machine we could afford. Looking at iMacs and MBAs, for $1K this was the best machine we could afford. Maybe eventually a refurb would appear that beat it spec-wise for the same price, but i have yet to see one.
     
Inkling
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2014, 04:41 PM
 
No, the new Mac mini, with its soldered in RAM isn't acceptable. Users can't upgrade the memory and Apple rips them off by charging two or three times the market rate—and that's for RAM on a card.

Apple shows yet again it's doesn't understand that the markets is larger than upper-middle class people who buy for style and get oh-so confused if they're expected to attach a monitor, hence the iMac's built-in one.

But 'creatives' like me are intimidated by a few cables. We need to be able to attach two near-identical displays. Paid and on tight schedules, we need something that can be fixed, typically the display or hard drive, in minutes not the horrors of repairs on an iMac.
Author of Untangling Tolkien and Chesterton on War and Peace
     
snapper02
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2014, 07:21 PM
 
Yes but can it render H.265 video?? this will be the new standard that will allow 4k video to live in ubiquity. Current 4k is pushed out via H.264. iPhone6 and 6+ booth are capable of H.265 which was a selling point for me.
     
Mike Wuerthele
Managing Editor
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2014, 07:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Inkling View Post
No, the new Mac mini, with its soldered in RAM isn't acceptable. Users can't upgrade the memory and Apple rips them off by charging two or three times the market rate—and that's for RAM on a card.
This is no different than they've been doing for years, and we expect them to change?

Apple shows yet again it's doesn't understand that the markets is larger than upper-middle class people who buy for style and get oh-so confused if they're expected to attach a monitor, hence the iMac's built-in one.
I'm really not sure where you get this. I am nowhere near upper middle class, and I'm still pretty happy with my fleet of machines. Plus, I'm near certain that Apple understand the market better than we do.

MY needs, and YOUR needs may not be met by the Mini. Like I said when I ended the article, this is NOT everybody's perfect computer. The Mac mini isn't a perfect computer, and it never has been. This article doesn't even claim that its a perfect device. It is, however, not the disaster and the end of Apple that Internet discussion makes it out to be.

But 'creatives' like me are intimidated by a few cables. We need to be able to attach two near-identical displays. Paid and on tight schedules, we need something that can be fixed, typically the display or hard drive, in minutes not the horrors of repairs on an iMac.
So, how does this iteration of the Mini not work for you, then? It can handle two displays. The hard drive can be swapped out in less than 20 minutes, assuming you've got a T6.

If you're paid and on a tight schedule, then get two $499 minis for the price of one iMac. One dies? Swap it out. That's what you do with mission critical hardware -- you don't give a single point of failure the ability to take down your wage earning.
     
Mike Wuerthele
Managing Editor
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 25, 2014, 07:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by snapper02 View Post
Yes but can it render H.265 video?? this will be the new standard that will allow 4k video to live in ubiquity. Current 4k is pushed out via H.264. iPhone6 and 6+ booth are capable of H.265 which was a selling point for me.
The processor in the mini can on Windows, so there's no compelling reason why it shouldn't on OS X. Apple says it can.

I know that H.265 is the future, but that future's not quite here yet. We'll see how it goes.
     
techweenie1
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 27, 2014, 11:45 AM
 
I'm pretty pissed that Apple believes PCIe is dead...for this reason I will spend my time in the Hackintosh community.
     
n2it
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2014
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2014, 02:32 PM
 
Interesting article. I went back and forth on this for a while. I just bought my first mac ... a mac mini 2012 instead of 2014. I did it simply because I needed more memory (want to run VMs, including windows) and didn't want (couldn't afford?) to pay the extremely inflated apple memory prices. I, like many folks, need to get as much value as possible. I also got an open box ($399 for the lowest model) and spent a little over $100 to upgrade to 16 gb.

I think Apple does understand the market. They choose to make it about customer experience, not about offering the customer the best value. They can command a large margin which while it does not serve a customer like me, it serves their business model of high margins and shareholder returns (nothing wrong there). I think where Apple falls short is on sustainability - since can't upgraded (at least memory).

That being said, I agree that 4 gb of memory and Intel HD 5000 is fine for most entry level folks. And 2 thunderbolt of 4 usb 3.0, gigabit, wifi, bt and 1 hdmi give it plenty of connectivity / expansion room. I wish in the future I don't have to make that choice and Apple will give me the option of upgrading my own memory, but we'll see if I like it and if I will be willing to spend more than a PC when I get my next device (to get a memory upgrade).
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:18 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,