So happy with my base M4 purchase for $499 when it released. I even snagged a 1TB replacement drive for $199 a year ago. Feels like I got the last train out.
Same thing for me! Got it with the education discount when it came out in 2024 and, although I've been pretty disappointed with macOS, it's crazy to see that the price increased by $300 in less than 2 years, with no sign of the price increases slowing down.<p>What will happen once people are priced out of buying computers? I find this worrying.
I don't really understand this dooming. All market forecasters, memory bulk purchasers and the memory producers themselves have stated multiple times, unequivocally that the shortage will get worse in 2027 and then as new fabs come online the shortage will taper off as 2028 progresses.<p>We've been through.. 4? 5? memory boom-bust-boom cycles already. Nothing is pointing to this one being any different, aside it probably becoming the mother of all busts since AI isn't adding much productivity and as businesses realize this, they'll stop paying top dollar for access meaning AI vendors cancel all their reserved fab capacity.<p>The fabs already exist at that point so it's less of a loss for the memory fabs to crank out memory chips and have the RAM OEMs sell them at bargain bin prices. No pseudo-cartel pricing possible either with CMXT becoming a major player. $50 for 32GB-64GB of DDR5 in 2029 here we come babyy
>I don't really understand this dooming.<p>no one remembers the last time things got better rather than worse. shitcoin-driven scarcity seamlessly transitioned into COVID-driven scarcity and now into hyperscaler-driven scarcity. the chipmakers' cabal decided to meet increased demand with four digit margins rather than expanding production.
<a href="https://qz.com/sk-hynix-ceo-memory-shortage-2027-warning-071326" rel="nofollow">https://qz.com/sk-hynix-ceo-memory-shortage-2027-warning-071...</a>
> AI isn't adding much productivity<p>Would love to know where this comes from. I am not sure about that. Could you point to data/anecdata?
> What will happen once people are priced out of buying computers? I find this worrying.<p>What happens is that people start buying Chinese mini PCs, some of those even have spyware preinstalled along with another malware that is Windows 11
> What will happen once people are priced out of buying computers?<p>If it persists for years people will have time to spin up more fabs and meet demand
> What will happen once people are priced out of buying computers? I find this worrying.<p>I’m sure some kind capitalist will be happy to rent them a thin client linked to a computer in the cloud.
What do you think chromebooks are?
Apple is already leasing phones/computers..........
My take: this was done to pull consumers back into the cycle of upgrading to every new release. iPhones already do so much more than most people need. With the RAM price hikes, even though there was an influx of sales (according to a store rep) initially, I think Apple was expected a significant decline; people just choosing to stick with their current device to avoid paying the premium.<p>Leasing not only allows Apple to keep "selling" people new devices, it will also mostly like accelerate the second-hand sales and resource recycling arms of the business. Consumers will be more willing to upgrade sooner and stay in perpetual payments vs having to buy out the device at lease end - and Apple gets back newer devices where the recycled tech is arguably more valuable.
Yeah the era of the personal computer is over.<p>Companies will prioritize components for cloud computing and lease us thin clients...
<i>I’m sure some kind capitalist will be happy to rent them a thin client linked to a computer in the cloud.</i><p>Maybe we'll see a return to the late 1990's, when companies would give you a free computer as long as you allowed it to constantly display an ad banner on the top of the screen.
Capitalism will lead to:<p>- Lots of options competing on quality, price, user experience, user needs<p>- Every marketplace innovation that we talk about on this platform<p>So somebody might offer exactly that and if it's a good option, people will use it. If it's not, they'll use an alternative.<p>Government regulation will lead to:<p>- Giant entrenched companies that are difficult to disrupt thanks to insider connections<p>- Lack of competition, price increases, terrible customer service and pretty much everything that "anti-capitalists" today complain about in regards to capitalism.
*gestures at prices*
In Soviet Russia, prices so low no inventory left!
Quantitative easing and fiscal stimulus entered the chat a while ago.
<i>gestures at supply and demand</i>
So, government regulation will lead to all bad things we see today in capitalism? But capitalism won't. This is not very sound logic.
Hey now, let’s not burst his utopic bubble.
Theory holds so far.<p>Everything government involvement touches gets more expensive. See healthcare, college tuition, student loan debt as some easy examples.
Two of those are the same thing and both are much cheaper in countries other than the US where the government is much more involved
That’s odd because spend on all of those things per capita is consistently lower with better outcomes where they’re socialized.
> <i>See healthcare</i><p>Medicare is cheaper that US private insurance:<p>* <a href="https://www.kff.org/medicare/how-much-more-than-medicare-do-private-insurers-pay-a-review-of-the-literature/" rel="nofollow">https://www.kff.org/medicare/how-much-more-than-medicare-do-...</a><p>Also:<p>> <i>A single-payer universal health care system could cover every American, save more than 100,000 lives a year, and still cost $1 trillion less than the system it would replace, according to a new preprint study led by researchers at the Yale School of Public Health.</i><p>* <a href="https://ysph.yale.edu/news-article/universal-health-coverage-could-save-one-trillion-dollars-and-114000-lives-every-year/" rel="nofollow">https://ysph.yale.edu/news-article/universal-health-coverage...</a>
Capitalism under the control of a few billionaires who can influence the entire market with FUD leads to: current market conditions.
Pure hn libertarian moment
<i>for all values of spherical cows in a vacuum</i>
> Government regulation will lead to:
>
> - Giant entrenched companies that are difficult to disrupt thanks to insider connections<p>Oh, you mean like Apple, Google, and Microsoft?<p>> - Lack of competition, price increases, terrible customer service and pretty much everything that "anti-capitalists" today complain about in regards to capitalism.<p>Have you looked around? This is already happening.
Capitalism doesn't exist without government regulation. Who's going to enforce the contracts? Who's going to break up the giant entrenched companies rent-squeezing every cent out of their natural monopolies, and then using their illicit gains to crush any would-be competitors as they ooze into other markets?<p>Literally everything listed for 'government regulation will lead to' can and has happened in unchecked capitalism. Insider connections rule everything right now in this current regime of chest-beating 'capitalists.'<p>Capitalism and socialism aren't real things outside of freshman year econ textbooks.
Maybe they will have to use/repair/upgrade the ones they already own?
I got an Apple refurbished m4 Mac mini with 32gb ram and 512gb ssd in September last year for $1300 Canadian.<p>The m6 with same specs are $2000.<p>Also m4 Mac mini seem to now be in stock on their refurbished store.
I was not in need of a mac mini then and I’m not in need now, but damn I hope my laptop will last a long time because FML the best price/performance minipc of the last few years got wrecked and the entire market is in shambles
I got a 32gb M4 macbook air with the lower CPU core count, right before things got stupid. Can't even buy that skew now.
I'm kind of lost on what to do with it. I have better workstation PCs, and I couldn't find a good way to turn it into a media center - it would be a great living room PC - but couldn't find a BT remote friendly solution last time I checked. Anyone has a solution for this ? I don't want to be using mouse/keyboard every time I sit on the couch - something that would let me stream something like jellyfin fullscreen with a remote ?
Maybe try a Steam Controller? I've used the OG one. I think the device itself registers as a keyboard. Its trackpad controls the mouse cursor and the triggers act as the various mouse clicks.<p>If you are running Steam in the background, one of the buttons triggers an HUD keyboard, where the left trackpad types keys on the left side of the keyboard and the right trackpad for the right side of the keyboard. My guess is the new controller works the same way.<p>Also, some media center software, such as Kodi, have gamepad support. So a gamepad will feel completely natural to control it without having to resort to using the mouse and HUD keyboard.
Sell it. Sounds like you have too many computers already and didn't need it.
There are various "air mouse" variants that properly work with MacOS as well. I have one with some media/navigation keys on the front, and a tiny keyboard on the back - kodi I can navigate just with the navigation keys, and if I want to do a bit more (but not get out the proper keyboard) I just flip it around, and can do that as well.
> I'm kind of lost on what to do with it.<p>Personal assistant (e.g. openclaw) in the mac ecosystem. You need external models to power it ofc, but cool to have all the Apple integration and local network in your assistant. The claw can be addressed in multiple ways and can command your local hardware if you so wish.
I recommend a combined keyboard+trackpad device. Compact, fully featured.
You can buy a remote sized kb/mouse for 10$.
Wait, their website only shows preorders for M6 or M5 Pro, and they have nothing about the M4. So do they currently have zero Mac minis in stock?
Yes. I looked just two days ago to purchase a M4 Mac mini (I had no idea they would refresh it), and estimated delivery times were '5-6 weeks', with the highest RAM configs unavailable. Other retailers still have some in stock though.
I wish I picked one up last fall when the stores were trying to clear them out. Now you can’t even buy them in person.
I feel that way about my GPU for normal gaming use. Now I’m afraid of it dying on me.
I don't really care about gaming, but there's a PC I got for free a while back with a 2060ti that overheats if I don't peg the fans at 100% and keep the case open. Would be nice if that holds on.
I’m currently hoping that my Intel Arc B580 doesn’t die on me cause even a 5060 Ti 16 GB has reached like 700 EUR price over here. I don’t think the prices will get better anytime soon.<p>Same with my M1 Air for being on the move, even notebooks would be more expensive than they’re worth.
I’m milking my M1 Air, too. It’s still going strong, and I just can’t justify replacing it. Would love 64GB or more memory, though.
Consider underclocking/undervolt it a little, especially if you aren’t using the GPU to its full potential.<p>It will last longer and hopefully the GPU prices will recover in a few years.<p>I hope
I almost bought one for my kids back then and now seriously regret that I didn't.<p>My son is using my old ~2011 Mac mini with Linux Mint on it. Slow but works.
[flagged]
It's a bit of an emotional goodbye to the super cheap Mac Minis we got to enjoy for a while. I got some for family members, we had some serving as iOS/macOS build servers sitting in a closet at my last job, they were fantastic.<p>Not that they're a bad deal now, but at European prices of over €1000 for M6/16GB/256GB it's a psychological barrier that's been broken.
When they discontinued the M4 with 16GB a few months ago I had literally just ordered one off Amazon which they promptly cancelled. It would have been 600 after exchange rate from GBP.<p>I can't justify a more than 2x price increase for what I'm guessing are marginal improvements. I want to replace my home lab but as it stands my underpowered NAS will have to continue as it has the past few years
If you adjust for inflation, is it a big change from the super cheap Mac Minis of the past? Probably still somewhat more expensive, but not as much as the nominal difference would imply.
> but at European prices of over €1000 for M6/16GB/256GB it's a psychological barrier that's been broken.<p>We should be buying European solutions anyway. Different psychological barrier that was broken long before.
No bro, >1000€ for 16/256 is a really bad deal
[dead]
[flagged]
One of the things that Steve Jobs got very right was "and you can order right now". Announcements where you have to wait a month to order throw away all of the hype. Even allowing pre-orders and shipping later is a better idea and so silly that Apple has started walking away from that.
Wonder how the cybertruck sales would have gone if tesla had done that.<p>(250,000 pre-orders, vs now ~5000 sales/quarter)
I would venture a guess that... other... things happening related to Telsa over the course of the couple of years between the announcement and when you could actually buy one had a much bigger impact on sales.
I am so glad these hunks of steel and road hazards are illegal over here.
Well, I think the cybertruck was announced at least a year or two before they shipped. A month wait is one thing, but giving people literal years to think about and find flaws with your product is a really bad move.
I am shocked every time I see one of those driving in SF. street parking must be awful!
At least in the UK, that's exactly what they're doing right now. They're allowing pre-orders, with shipping on Sept 22.
What I am missing in all of those benchmarks, how does the M6 compares to the M5 Pro.<p>I don't care how the M6 compares to the M1, even when the M6 2.3x compared to M1 in Excel spreadsheet. That is no measurement even in accounting. The dead time is not the Excel.<p>I am to only one?
The big difference you're not looking at is the memory bandwidth. The M5 Pro has nearly twice the one of the M6:<p>170GB/s memory bandwidth
Configurable up to 32GB unified memory<p>307GB/s memory bandwidth
Configurable up to 64GB unified memory<p>That is also the factor you want to take into account for AI inference, of course.
Last time the benchmark numbers from apple were stupid and they still are.<p>I just wait for practical real live numbers with real stacks i use.<p>And btw. they reduced the memory bandwdith on the M4 in comparision to its previous version by 40gb/sec or so, you need to wait to see.
It basically means that every meaningful comparison produced an embarrassing improvement multiplier
Upgraded my work machine from an M1 MBP to an M4 Mac Mini a couple of years ago. I do a lot of work in Excel with large sheets. The performance improvement was very noticeable and appreciated!
Benchmarks from the manufacturer are just marketing as well. Wait for independent 3rd party reviews.
<a href="https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/08/apple-introduces-m6-and-m5-ultra-for-a-big-leap-in-performance-and-ai-compute" rel="nofollow">https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/08/apple-introduces-m6-a...</a><p>Says 1.2x for multithreaded and doesn't specify (I presume smaller) for single-threaded. That's compared to M5 not M5 Pro, so M5 Pro is likely significantly faster.
> for always-on agentic computing<p>Don’t know, but this as main ad headline feels almost like a threat to my personal home computing needs
Don't worry, there are exactly zero Apple chips that are good for any sort of local inference right now. Unified ram is fast for ram, but dogshit slow compared to actual dedicated VRAM on graphics cards.
Your statement is not really true any more.<p>I have an old M1 Max with 32GB that runs inference models fine, especially those using MLX.<p>Dedicated graphics cards are faster but not to the point that it matters.<p>That’s a six year old machine.<p>My newer machine M5 max 128GB will far outperform your typical 32GB gaming card once the model exceeds memory.<p>To even get close to that on a dedicated graphics card you are paying upwards of $20K.<p>That said, models are getting smaller and faster which allows me to run multiple different models with ease.<p>[edit] Just checked the 5 models I use take up 57GB when all loaded at the same time.
The $8k machine will out preform the 1k gaming machine sure but it wont out preform anything in a similar price range.
> Dedicated graphics cards are faster but not to the point that it matters.<p>It definitely matters, if you're intending to run a Claude Code/OpenCode style agent workflow. Most of those harnesses <i>start</i> with 8-12k token contexts, which is a lot of prefill for a Mac but cheap for a CUDA GPU. The GPGPU compute on the fastest Macs is still trailing behind Nvidia's <i>laptop</i> GPUs; the highest-bandwidth Apple Silicon chip (now the M5 Ultra) has ~7x lower memory bandwidth than a single B100 card.<p>There's a good reason why Apple Silicon isn't to be found anywhere in the datacenter buildout. It's nonviable for training, and wastes electricity running real-world inference workloads.
That selling point is probably more about using a claude code subscription than running your own models. Because of apple's lockin there are certain things you can only do on apple devices and a mac mini is useful for that
The M-chips are insanely powerful. So powerful for my regular use that I'm still on M1-generated devices and don't really need to update. Perhaps in a few years when both local-running LLMs are good enough on regular consumer hardware there'll be a good reason to upgrade.<p>As a disclaimer though, I haven't even tried to really run local models on the M1 as I also have a 'gaming PC' that can run them fine.
I feel much the same. I feel like the next time I upgrade I could splurge a bit more and get a really bigger CPU and storage to be even more productive with.<p>However the main reason I would upgrade is to run LLMs locally and RAM prices are making this a no-go. One day if RAM comes down to earth I'll upgrade. If not I'll stick to this old machine for a long time.
yeah my m1 mac studio shows no signs of stopping and i can't justify another upgrade until doing so really unlocks something new at a reasonable price (like running local llms that are competitive with the cloud services at a decent speed, which presumably the mac studio M5 Ultras can do with qwen 3.8 but the 256GB Ultra config is more than $10k!)
> Perhaps in a few years when both local-running LLMs are good enough on regular consumer hardware there'll be a good reason to upgrade.<p>I mean, local LLMs already are really good if you own Nvidia Cards, not sure what you are waiting for. 2x3090 will blow any current Mac out of the water in tok/sec
I was talking about upgrading to another M-series device. I actually mentioned in the comment that you're replying to that I do run them locally on my desktop. And I run them off of an AMD card, 7900XTX.<p>I'm not sure I'd consider a gaming PC 'regular consumer' hardware especially with today's prices. But yeah, it's definitely doable.
After watching a video about how the filesystems are > 2x faster (and testing this myself in my mac mini vs a linux machine), I feel like Apple is leaving a lot on the table, and I hope that they get APFS to be as fast as the linux filesystems.<p>Because otherwise a lot of this hardware (including their blazing fast SSDs) is wasted. Cuz my M1 mac mini is awesome otherwise.
I took a peek into APFS a bit ago [1] because I (stupidly) yanked a usb SSD before it was unmounted and corrupted it. Reading the documentation, it seems to have many "cool" features which just aren't fully exposed/utilized in the OS, and there is a lack of API tooling.<p>For example: it is copy-on-write, and my corruption happened in the superblock checkpoint. There is no built-in command in Disk Utility to "mount" an older checkpoint (and accepting a small amount of dataloss). Also the "First Aid" command allegedly runs volume repair top-down when it is recommended to do it inside-out.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.ntfs.com/apfs-structure.htm" rel="nofollow">https://www.ntfs.com/apfs-structure.htm</a>
It might not be the fastest, but at least it supports setting/keeping file creation time - unlike the clusterf*ck we still have on basically all Linux filesystems unfortunately
Is APFS that much slower than ZFS or btrfs (more comparable Linux file systems) or just ext4? Btrfs is noticeably slower than ext4, but at least all the Mac and Linux file systems are way faster than file operations on Windows :)
Here's a very recent video benchmarking APFS vs ZFS, btrfs, and XFS+: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wVNFaFDIn8" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wVNFaFDIn8</a>
> Up to 2x faster gaming performance with ray tracing in Cyberpunk 2077: Ultimate Edition when compared to Mac mini with M4.<p>Interesting that Apple quotes performances when playing Cyberpunk 2077 ! Maybe they will want to care more about gaming ?<p>And while i'm at it, I was wondering a few weeks ago if I should try this game on my M3 pro. Anyone has played it on Apple and has feedback ?
Apple does this thing where they pick a very old game and then boast about how well it runs. It's so bizarre.<p>Not like Mac gaming is good anyway...they have "Game Porting Toolkit" but it's not free and open like Proton so nobody will use it unless Apple pushes them. Removing Rosetta doesn't help either.
In fairness, Cyberpunk 2077 might be 5 years old but it is the modern day "Can it run Crysis". It is absolutely still a hard game to run.
In fairness, Cyberpunk 2077 is playable <i>through Wine translation</i> on a $400 base model Steam Deck.<p>The game gets a bad rap for the last-gen console performance, but even 2020's iGPUs could handle it: <a href="https://youtu.be/oUm5GmJcBPA" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/oUm5GmJcBPA</a>
Also "will it run Minecraft with shaders"
Apple also just can't give up the idea of selling games through the AppStore either and you end up with situations like with AC: Shadows where it was ported, but you must buy the macport via the app store. Your copy on steam does not include the mac port, so if you wan to play on both your Windows/Linux desktop and Mac, you have to buy it twice. So stupid.
Cyberpunk isn't old to macOS, they just released the native version a few months ago.
Cyberpunk is THE PC benchmark game since it released
> Game Porting Toolkit" but it's not free and open like Proton so nobody will use it unless Apple pushes them.<p>I don't know what this means - game porting toolkit is free
From what I've seen they do care quite a bit about gaming, but not to the point where they're willing to actually do much about it, so I wouldn't expect a proton style compatibility layer anytime soon unfortunately
I play quite a few games on my Mac Mini via Crossover, but rarely anything particularly graphically intensive. Though I do see occasional buzz about improvements in the game porting toolkit leading to significant perf improvements when they make their way into Crossover.
cp2077 sits permanently at 60fps and looks great on my m1 max 64gb. I used to play it on my 4090, but once I figured out how to do redmods on macos I quit using it and play it on my mac to save power (I'm 100% solar powered and barely generate 600w, 4090 consumes 500+). In apples infinite wisdom they don't support egpus, so my 4090 egpu will never work with my mac, which was a really disappointing thing to discover.
> Interesting that Apple quotes performances when playing Cyberpunk 2077 ! Maybe they will want to care more about gaming ?<p>They include game metrics in their marketing often, because they know their customers care about gaming. But no—for whatever reason, it never translates into Apple caring about gaming. I don't get it, but that's the way it has been for a long time.
With the “game mode” and “game porting toolkit” in recent history, I think there’s one person at Apple who cares about gaming and every couple of years he escapes from the basement where they keep him locked up and manages to sneak something into the release branch<p>They’ve also said when they pull Rosetta for intel compatibility, it will still be available for old games to use, which is a huge improvement from their usual stance of “that game studio that hasn’t existed since 2008 should dust off their code and update it to our new architecture.”
they've done a bunch to make macs a better gaming platform, including the very nice game porting toolkit (<a href="https://developer.apple.com/games/game-porting-toolkit/" rel="nofollow">https://developer.apple.com/games/game-porting-toolkit/</a>) which you can use yourself to run pc games on the mac. All macs since m1 have very nice gpus that can handle most games made today, and the newer ones can run the latest AAA ones with good detail. At this point it's more that game publishers/studios don't care about the mac
Do we need a 3rd top level discussion on this?
2.5Gbe as standard is nice.
About damn time, Gigabit ethernet started shipping on desktop Macs over 20 years ago.
I'm curious what 2.5GbE chipset they used.
Still no SFP option?
10 years later from the rest of the market
The "4x AI performance" smells suspicious to me, M5 Pro does have slightly higher memory bandwidth than the M4 Pro, but there are also the new Neural Accelerators in the GPU cores, I've always wondered what they actually do, since the SoC has AMX (Apple Matrix Coprocessor) since the original M1 chip era.<p>So is this performance gain probably due to the new Neural Accelerators?
Yes, the "neural accelerators" in the M5 GPU cores really do 4x pre-fill performance over M4. You can find benchmarks online since M5 has been out for months now. I assume the M6 has whatever the next-gen version of those is. These are not the "neural processors" that have been there since M1 (those still exist) but are additionl matrix math accelerators inside the actual GPU cores. Like "tensor cores" on Nvidia GPUs.
Thank you, found some benchmarks and they look really promising. To my understanding those Neural Accelerators are like AMX but for GPUs. With those accelerators the GPU performance on a M5 Max in LLM inferencing would totally be on par with a 5090, that's quite impressive!
Double the price of the base m4 mac mini in February :(<p>(it was late in it's lifecycle and there were frequent sales)
I will buy a Mac mini, 64GB RAM + 2TB. That will replace my current MBP M1 Pro with 16GB (4 years old). For serious upgrade I will wait the M7 Line.
Which is more important for AI/LLM stuff, the number of GPU cores or the amount of unified memory? I can choose from a Mini with the M5 Pro 18CPU/30GPU and 64GB RAM or a Studio with a M5 Max 18CPU/40GPU and 48GB RAM for roughly the same price
They are both somewhat important. The compute speed impacts the tokens per second, and memory impacts the size of the model/capability.<p>IMO memory size is the most important since you can always wait longer for it to compute while a blazing fast but dumb model is much less useful.
Larger model -> more memory<p>It depends on what model(s) you want to run.
They affect different things. You want more powerful models -> more memory. You want the models that run to be faster -> more gpu cores.
Memory bandwidth is one of the most important factors. The Max machines typically have higher bandwidth than Pro (you should look up these exact models to verify though). Having said that, you could run bigger models with 64GB.<p>I went with a 64GB M2 Max a few years back even though it stretched my budget and I'm glad I did. I'm not sure what I'd pick in this case. Tough call.
Related? "Apple to skip high-end M6 Mac chips in favor of AI-focused M7 line" june 2026 <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48676795">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48676795</a> 380 comments
I see that my old M1 Mac Mini with 16 GB memory and 1 TB drive has held value over time, selling for $600 to $700.<p>A new Mac Mini with that much ram and storage costs about double now.
Wow. Is OpenClaw still alive? Would their users spend so many for the new Mac mini?
I really want to buy one for coding/dev work, but it's just too expensive. Not sure if the M4 MacBook will get a price cut anytime soon.
Is the "Water Project" intended as a sly dig or some kind of nod to AI water use concerns?
price hike makes the deal not so sweet, but still a bang on device
I’m not really sure what the end goal is with Apple investing so heavily in local AI hardware.<p>Feels like they’re doing it for the sake of getting with the times, but why would the average Mac User care? I wonder if this an answer the OpenClaw craze.
So I guess M5 Pro is better, right?
glad that i purchased mac studio this January
Not a surprise with John Ternus taking the reigns as CEO in a week, who was previously SVP of hardware engineering.<p>I can't hate a direction where Apple becomes more about building great computers rather than trying to force more and more subscriptions. I do wish they would fix many of the long-standing OS and native app problems.
I don't think polishing macos more will win more users, Windows is a flaming garbage heap where virtually every built in program is broken and people keep using it. Making macbooks cheaper and more accessible will do far more.
I do worry that at this point it's no longer just Apple's problem to solve. They need to figure out a way to take the rest of the industry with it. Maybe if their standards are high enough everyone else will look bad by comparison.<p>My daily driver personal machines are incredible pieces of kit, but everything is always getting worse because majority of software is some SaaS living in the cloud, or even if on-desktop is constantly updating slop.<p>Why does it take 10 seconds for my streaming music app to open when my machine is 10-20 cores, 32GB+ RAM, high bandwidth NVMe storage, and I am connected to gigabit fiber internet? The thing is autoplaying videos, and has about 10 different panes clearly owned by different product managers that hate each other. Half the time its pushing me some pop-up dialog I don't care about.<p>Winamp in 1998 took about 2 seconds to load.
I agree with you, but I also think sadly most consumers don't really care about this. The reason the internet is in the state it's in is because most people tolerate it.<p>Most people simply don't care about using well-made software so long as it gets the job done because they don't even look at other options. I suppose this is how carpenters feel when they see ubiquitous IKEA furniture.
Very well timed for John Ternus's first quarter.
I'm so sick of "up to 2x faster" ...THAN WHAT? ON WHAT WORKLOAD? How can I reproduce these claims?<p>I really miss when vendors would run the SPEC benchmark suite and performance was quantitative, and not qualitative.
… from the fine print:<p>“Results are compared to previous-generation Mac mini systems with Apple M4, 10-core CPU, 10-core GPU, 32GB of unified memory, and 2TB SSD.”
I’m still not convinced by the value of local models. It feels like ray-tracing where we are driving up the compute cost for a high cost and fringe benefit.
It's not worth it yet when datacenter compute is being subsidized and consumer hardware is massively overpriced, but the tipping point will come where it makes far more sense.<p>Particularly with Chinese companies pushing to get more out of smaller models. You can run really capable models on the top end macs right now, it just costs way more than buying credits.
Upgrading to 48GB memory is $600…. Gut punch. I have a M4 Pro (top cpu skew 14 cores). Any idea the performance gain to M5 Pro? I feel like they holding off releasing M6 Pro because a new studio is dropping soon as well.
hmm waited for this, but the price... puuh
The "up to" and "Yx" compared to three generations ago specs from Apple. Never change.
I think there's a valid argument for this pattern when you know most people are on 3-ish year upgrade cycles. Also, if you compare against the most recent generation, you risk creating buyer's remorse for recent purchases.
I'd imagine most are on longer than 3 years for computers. Most (non developers) I know hang onto their laptops and computers until they die or get spec constrained, and that ends up being around ~6 or 7 years, so in this case the comparison to the M1/M1 Max makes sense, as for the next couple years that's going to be the cohort that's looking to upgrade.
Sigh. I had the m4 in my cart yesterday and now it is gone.
~75% higher price for some extra GPU power and small CPU boost compared to M4? Eh. It's pretty far from M4's value, which was a no-brainer recommendation for people who wanted a tiny box sitting somewhere on their desk.
So the price just went up by another $100 am I reading that right?
Yup. Yesterday it was $799 for the base Mac Mini M4, a $200 increase from the original MSRP before June’s price hikes.<p>I paid $499 for my M4 back in April with the academic discount since I predicted the next generation base model would cost more. Sadly my prediction was correct: $599 to $899 is steep. I understand why; the prices of DIMMs, GPUs, and SSDs have also skyrocketed. But $899 for a base Mac Mini is painful, even if the alternatives on the current market are also painfully expensive.
Faster CPU and Ethernet is certainly worth $100. Sucks though, I agree.
Era of cheap compute is over I'm afraid
No, it's not. We do have to live through this long and harsh winter, though.
I really want a mini for running local models, but there's no way I'm buying one for the next few years. I'm planning on waiting for models to get better and more powerful, as well as for hardware prices to come down.
Over <i>for now</i>, or at least a little while until production ramps up to our new reality (~5 years minimum is likely).
Pretty much. Everyone seems to think prices will come back down, but I don't agree.
Just got to wait for the wealth to trickle down to make it cheap again<p>/s
No 8GB option? Oh the horror.
Now if only it would come with Linux instead of MacOS!<p>Apple's software holds the hardware back, and it's ugly (especially liquid glass!)
Dear mods, please could these announcements be merged, if not done away with? They aren't really following the guidelines, they aren't 'curiosity', these are little more than marketing announcements.