Tim Cook Confirms the Mac Mini Isn't Dead (macrumors.com)

Apple has refreshed just about every Mac product within the last couple of years -- except for the Mac Mini. Naturally, this has left many analysts questioning whether or not the company would be phasing out the Mini to focus more on its mobile devices. A MacRumors reader decided to email Apple CEO Tim Cook to get an update on the Mac mini and he received a response. Cook said it was "not time to share any details," but he confirmed that the Mac mini will be an important part of the company's product lineup in the future. MacRumors reports: Cook's response echoes a similar statement from Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller, who commented on the Mac mini when Apple's plans for a new Mac Pro were unveiled. "The Mac mini is an important product in our lineup and we weren't bringing it up because it's more of a mix of consumer with some pro use," he said. Positioned as a "bring your own peripherals" machine that comes without a mouse, keyboard, or display, the Mac mini is Apple's most affordable desktop machine. The current version is woefully outdated though, and continues to use Haswell processors and integrated Intel HD 5000/Intel Iris Graphics. It's not clear when Apple will introduce a new Mac mini, and aside from a single rumor hinting at a new high-end Mac mini with a redesign that "won't be so mini anymore," we've heard no rumors about work on a possible Mac mini refresh.

Comments

Opportunist confirms

[Opportunist]

My faith in the veracity of Tim Cook's claims remains dead.

Put up or shut up. Apple has reached a level of credibility that I though was reserved for Microsoft.

The Mac Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

Tim Cook has shown he doesn't care about the Mac in general, let alone the Mac Mini. After launching the iPad Pro he asked, "Why would you buy a PC any more?" He believes the future of computing is tablets and smartphones and doesn't understand people have actual work to do.

To a large extent this shows why he shouldn't be running Apple. Since he took over they haven't managed to introduce a single new product line that has had any major impact on the market, but he has caused the Mac to lose about a third of its users. His whole plan for Apple seems to be "lets just keep releasing increment improvements to the iPhone".

The difference between Apple under Steve Jobs and Apple under Tim Cook is astounding. Under Tim Cook it is doing nothing, and he could easily be replaced by a block of wood and you would see no impact on the company. Just what is he being paid for?

Re:The Mac Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

If they don't care about the mac mini they should at least allow third-party PC vendors to build one. I'm tired of the single supplier model (and corresponding higher prices) of mac hardware.

The mac lineup needs a cheap desktop.

Re:The Mac Is Dead

[Opportunist]

No, it needs a new desktop.

The price of a Mac is at least partly justified by its hassle-free ecosystem. At least that's what it HAD. And yes, people are willing to pay a premium for the promise that their computer will "just work". This does unfortunately also require a single-supplier model to ensure that all components are up to the task, for you'll certainly find someone willing to cut corners (pardon the pun) and deliver a cheaper, crappier knockoff that does not work 100% of the time but only 90%, which isn't good enough if you want "just works".

But their computers just went stale, this isn't "tried and forged in the fire of time", this is just "tired and to be fired in time".

They aren't dead, they're on life support

[tlhIngan]

The two WORST SELLING Macs on Apple's lineup - the Mac Pro and Mac Mini.

And they always have been that way, before the Mac Pro became the trash can style computer - back when it was the super expandable computer with expansion slots and everything.

Neither of them are technically "dead" since Apple will sell you a new one that's years old and due for refreshes, but they're not stunning sellers that Apple finds worthy of putting more than the minimal amount of engineering effort into.

The Mac Pro does have a future - a tiny one for the tiny population of people who really need the power it has. The Mac Mini has always been more vague since other than a small desktop PC, it was always in a weird spot - did Apple position it as a living room computer driving the big screen TV, or as a regular desktop PC?

Anyhow, both have historically been poor sellers for several models now - both Mac Pro and Mac Mini owners have wondered for several generations of hardware - prior to the trash can design and even back wen Minis had optical drives.

Re:They aren't dead, they're on life support

[rl117]

These models don't need to be "best sellers". They need to fill niches which are not filled by any of their other models. Apple don't have a powerful and expandable system for high-end usage; none of their current offerings are good for that. Something that you can fill full of storage, GPUs and other PCI-E boards and do some serious stuff with. We'd buy them for work if they were available; we used to have several G5 towers. We also had several Xserves; if we could buy a current rackmount system we would. The mini is a desktop without a built-in display like the imac; I'd buy one if they made it a decent spec. At work, we develop cross-platform software and struggle greatly with Mac hardware. We need CI systems and would use a rackmount of pro tower for this if one was available. We use a couple of minis on a rack shelf, but they are miserable for CPU, storage and remote management. We use MacBook pros for personal use, but they are also woeful; they are handily beaten by a Dell a quarter of the price. I spend most of my time using Linux for development as a result; you can develop on a much more capable system: huge amount of storage, and as much CPU and memory as you like, plus a decent keyboard. Apple have badly dropped the ball here. They should be making high end systems to showcase the very best they have to offer. It doesn't matter about dedicating massive engineering resources to it; a tower is a tower, and it's not a fashion statement unlike their other models. I care more about what's inside the box.

Re:They aren't dead, they're on life support

[Paul Fernhout]

"I can go to Amazon and have on my desk, tomorrow, for $2000, a 16 core, 32 thread, 128GB system with a TB SSD. I can get more ram and a faster nvme too if I needed it. Apple would START pricing at $3999 for an 8/16 with 32GB and 256GB."

The closest I see on Amazon to those specs on Amazon is around US$5000 for "ADAMANT 16X-Core Liquid Cooled Workstation Desktop PC AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 3.4Ghz 128Gb DDR4 5TB HDD 500Gb M.2 SSD 1000W PSU AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB |3Year Warranty & Lifetime Tech Support|".

That is US$3000 more than you said was on Amazon and comparable with what you said Apple pricing would be.

So, links or it didn't happen. :-)

That said, I agree with much of the recent grousing about Apple about limitations for a professional computer user (like few ports, short battery life, and no pen interface on the recent MacBook Pro) or excessive costs and a short warranty for a home user for what you get (which has been true on and off for Apple for decades, but the OS and better design used to make up for some of that). Also, the move to lead-free solder across the industry has caused much early failures of Apple equipment (including a MacBook Pro I have from ~2011 and otherwise might still be using).

On the other hand, my multi-core Mac Pro from 2008 still works remarkably well (after various upgrades for memory, SSD, and graphics). And older MacBook Pros from the 2010 time period otherwise seemed like a fairly good deal at the time even maybe up to 2015 -- especially if you wanted a centered trackpad on a 15" laptop. And going further back to when Apple was more innovative, the Newton was groundbreaking and just reaching potential success with the MP2000 with the StrongArm. I liked having multiple monitor support on Nubus when many Windows users could not even understand multiple monitors setups were possible with a computer. HyperCard came from Apple and is still an amazing idea even now. And Squeak Smalltalk was/is neat.

So, yes, it is hard to look at an Apple with massive amounts of cash in the bank and wonder, why can't they produce innovation or a compelling professional computer anymore? Aside from early quality issues for both, Microsoft seems to be doing better with the SurfaceBook Pro and the Lenovo Yoga 720 seems amazing.

For me, the biggest disappointment given Apple's roots and the initial 1984video advertisement for the Mac, is perhaps that one might hope, as with HyperCard, Apple might take the side of the users against, say, social media surveillance, creating a "FreedomBox" Mac Mini..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"In one interpretation of the commercial, "1984" used the unnamed heroine to represent the coming of the Macintosh (indicated by her white tank top with a stylized line drawing of Appleâ(TM)s Macintosh computer on it) as a means of saving humanity from "conformity" (Big Brother).["

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"FreedomBox is a community project to develop, design and promote personal servers running free software for distributed social networking, email and audio/video communications."

Guess Linux is carrying on that idea... Writing this using Gallium OS on a repurposed Chromebook...

Weasel words

[damn_registrars]

I wouldn't take that reply to mean that it is dead or not. This isn't because we're dealing with Apple it's because we're dealing with a company. By comparison if Chevrolet announced this afternoon that they are canceling the Camaro again, Chevy fans would be up in arms over the brand abandoning them. If they instead coyly said they were "committed" to it and then gradually reduced production over the next few years until dropping it entirely by 2020 they could say it was "market pressures" and "consumer demand", without there having been any company plans for it before then.