Ars Technica:
With the newest Mac mini, gone is the two-core, four-thread 28W Haswell processor with up to 16GB soldered RAM. This machine boasts Coffee Lake processors, either a four-core, four-thread Core i3 base model or the six-core, 12-thread Core i7 chip as found in my review system. This processor is paired with up to 64GB socketed, user-serviceable RAM. Storage has also been shaken up. Instead of a range of hybrid and SSD options, the new Mac mini is all SSD, from 128GB to 2TB. There are four Thunderbolt 3 ports, one wired Ethernet port (usually gigabit, but optionally upgraded to 10 gigabit), an HDMI 2 port, two USB 3.1 generation 1 ports, and a 3.5mm headset jack.
It turns out that hardware can get a lot better when you wait four years between upgrades.
The mini is a much loved little box.
“Who’s going to review it?”
“I don’t know, who hates it before even opening the box?”
The Ars audience isn’t normal people and the problem is that they think that they are. One comments there talked about how all of the people who knows who use macOS on the desktop use hackintoshes. In what world are most desktop Mac users using custom built machines like that? Not the normal world.
People like the reviewer want traditional desktop cases with lots of slots etc etc. They don’t realize that about 5% of people EVER upgrade their desktops. Most people never do, they just buy a new PC when the old one is not enough. Well if people aren’t opening their machines to upgrade them… why make big machines with lots of slots that will never be used? Why NOT make something like the mini? Why not indeed… 😛
There’s a lot of money being spent on that kind of hate.
He also seems incapable of understanding that most people don’t give a shit (and won’t even KNOW) if machine A it half the speed of machine B as long as machine A is fast enough.
It’s not just ignorance, it’s ignorance blended with arrogance. I see him over there in the comments section carefully shooting down anyone who dares answer his “Who is this for?”
What an (self-censored).
no doubt. I can’t believe that here we are, 40 years later, apple’s now the most successful public company in history, and yet still there is so much hate for everything they do and the priorities with which they make decisions.
I think you could nitpick Apple’s decision a lot. Could it be a half in thinner? Sure. Would making it two inches thicker make it a better machine? Probably.
But it is what it is. If you like it, use it; if you don’t, don’t. Most of us don’t need “desktop class performance.” I’m a “pro” user and a little more performance would be nice, but I’m certainly not hurting. My 95 year-old grandfather has a Mac mini because it lets him use a bigger size but smaller resolution monitor. My parents would probably use one of these if not for their MacBook; it lets you keep your investment in a monitor, keyboard and mouse after all. There’s lots of reasons to get one of these. The reviewer’s lack of imagination shouldn’t make an entire review sound ridiculous.
I think a much more reasonable critique is the lack of ports on the front. The missing SD card slot would be welcome there, as would a USB port. They’re not critical omissions, but at least it’s rational to talk about that rather than “I don’t know who this is for!”
Interesting interpretation of the review there. Asking Peter Bright, the biggest Microsoft fanboy in history, to review a Mac was only going to end one way. Those comments too…..
It’s Peter Bright. He’s hated Apple for years. Strange choice of reviewer. Ars used to be my go to place for reasonable, intelligent discussion and comment. The quality has dropped off a cliff recently.
That was my take as well.
I’m curious if Shawn either was intentionally being coy for what is a problematic article to generate organic discussion, or if he skimmed the review and missed Peter’s analysis later on.
In a previous decade, this review might’ve been the task of lovely folks like Mike Elgan, Mary Jo Foley, or Paul Thurrott.
It’s nice to see that torch being handed down, isn’t it?
I still miss Jacqi…
I spend some of my time on Vimeo, one constant thing among VFX artists is switching to Windows machines.
I am not sure how prevalent it is, but it is a trend, even among C4D user and motion graphics artists.
GPU rendering rendered Renderman to a corner. And the Mac can follow the same fate, among the VFX crowd.
Asking, “Who is this for?” is a legitimate question.
However, like most tech writers, if it doesn’t suit their needs they really can’t see who it is for.
Can’t plug an external hard drive into an iPad? Well, who is it for?
Can’t upgrade the graphics card on the iMac? Well, who is it for?
Can’t add RAM to the MacBook? Who’s it for?
Why isn’t the Apple Watch round? Well, who’s it for?
Etc, etc…
I’d like to think nobody could make Paul Thurrott review a Mac because he just wouldn’t bother actually doing it.
It’s Shawn. He knows. 🙂
Sure, but not seeing the obvious answer?
I wouldn’t be surprised if the iMac has better sales, but the Mac mini is their desktop Mac intended to have the broadest appeal. it’s fast enough, and lets you reuse all your existing accessories (whether from a previous iMac that’s now obsolete, or a PC).
It’s not a question you can really pretend there’s no answer to.
Ah, yes. I neglected to consider that could just write 2,000 words on how he hates the Mac despite not having used one since 1988 or so.
Apple could manufacture a fully-tricked-out, cheap Windows-clone tower and that reviewer would likely find deal-killing problems with it.
Yeah, but I wouldn’t want to inflict the rest of the assholes on her. 🙂
Wait, did Thurrott ever write for Ars? I’ve been reading it for years and either have blacked that memory out or never saw it.
So, he does this on his current Thurrott dot com website (e.g., he’s still convinced Face ID on the iPhone was a terrible mistake).
The funny thing is that his site now has premium subscriptions, and most of his obnoxious articles are now behind the premium wall, so only true believers see them. 🙂
“No bright blue power LED or case fan that sounds like a vacuum cleaner. Who’s this even for?”
Ah. But you really are not being fair to any of them. All three of them are utterly excellent compared to Rob Enderle.
I vaguely remember The Macalope dedicating about half of his columns to Enderle a few years ago…
“No VGA or PS/2 ports? I can’t even.”
“And where’s the DA-15?”
Each of them (among others) regularly made Enderle-level claims and argued with similarly pandering illogic. They may have individually had fewer corporate clients than he, but their publishers got a bunch of traffic.
They intentionally did not serve their readers well.
He wouldn’t need to review it. He’d just categorically state that the machine was inherently deficient, by definition. “Obviously.”
Not to my knowledge. I simply cherry-picked some of the worst tech writers I could remember. DED’s old blog was fun to read thanks largely to them.
Hell, I’ve built OSX86 machines, and they’re toys*, for people who either “need” a very powerful OSX machine for cheaper and are willing to smash their head into a wall, or who want to play around.
(By which I mean they’re a bear to get working even close to as well as a real Mac, and they break on every OS update.
They’re for amusing oneself, not doing real work on, in almost all cases.)
(* My SE/30’s motherboard corroded. So now there’s an mini-ITX MB in the case with an i3-8100, and a 10.1″ LCD on place of the CRT, and it’s running OSX.
Poorly, because it’s a giant arcane pain im the ass to try and make it work well on normal PC hardware.)